Burden of schizophrenia among Japanese patients: a cross-sectional National Health and Wellness Survey.

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia places a great humanistic and financial burden to patients, families, and societies, and the burden is substantially impacted by comorbid conditions. This study aimed to estimate the lifetime prevalence of schizophrenia and to assess the health-related quality of life (HRQoL), work productivity, and indirect cost among schizophrenia patients with and without comorbidities (depressive symptoms, sleep disturbances, and anxiety problems). METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of existing data collected in 2019 from the Japan National Health and Wellness Survey. The schizophrenia patients were categorized based on their Patient Health Questionnaire-9 score, self-reported experience of sleep disturbances, and anxiety problems. The lifetime prevalence was estimated using the total number of diagnosed schizophrenia patients as the numerator and the total number of respondents as the denominator. The HRQoL was evaluated through the Short Form 12-Item (version 2) Health Survey and EuroQoL 5-dimensions scale. Work productivity and annual indirect costs were evaluated through the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment instrument and monthly wage rates. Multivariate analyses included the comparison of outcomes using generalized linear models. RESULTS: The study was conducted with 178 schizophrenia patients with an average age of 42.7 years old and an estimated lifetime prevalence of 0.59% (95% CI: 0.51%, 0.68%). Patients who experienced sleep disturbances, more severe depressive symptoms, and anxiety problems had lower HRQoL, higher levels of absenteeism, presenteeism, total work productivity and activity impairment, and almost twice more indirect costs, compared to those without these conditions. CONCLUSION: Comorbid conditions among patients with schizophrenia impact significantly on their quality of life, work productivity as well as indirect costs.

Antidepressive Effect of Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Schizophrenia: Meta-Regression Analysis of Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Antipsychotics improve the positive symptoms of schizophrenia. However, little is known about the extent of antidepressive effects of antipsychotics and their correlation with effects on other symptom domains in schizophrenia. The aim was to investigate whether antidepressive effects of antipsychotics have a significant correlation with the effects on specific symptom domains of schizophrenia. METHODS: Electronic databases were searched to identify eligible studies that reported antidepressive effects of antipsychotics for the treatment of adult patients with schizophrenia in double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs). Mean change from baseline in depressive symptoms was meta-analyzed, and the correlation with the effects on other symptom domains was examined through meta-regression analysis. RESULTS: Thirty-five RCTs (13 890 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, antipsychotics showed greater efficacy than placebo in reducing depressive symptoms, with small to medium effect sizes (standardized mean difference = -0.27, 95% confidence interval -0.32 to -0.22, P < .001). All the antipsychotics, except for chlorpromazine, haloperidol, and ziprasidone, were associated with significantly greater decreases in depressive symptoms compared with placebo (standardized mean difference = -0.19 to -0.40). A higher antidepressive effect was significantly correlated with a higher improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale/Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale total, positive, and negative, and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-general psychopathology symptoms (ß = .618, P < .001; ß = .476, P < .001; ß = .689, P < .001; ß = .603, P < .001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Second-generation antipsychotics (except for ziprasidone) were associated with small to medium effects sizes on improvement in depressive symptoms among adult patients with schizophrenia. The antidepressive effect of antipsychotics was significantly correlated with improvement in other symptom domains, with the highest correlation observed for improvement in negative symptoms. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42019133015.

Efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics for acute bipolar depression: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: While clinical trial evidence has firmly established the efficacy of several atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for treating bipolar depression, no randomized controlled trials (RCT's) comparing AAPs have been conducted. This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy and tolerability of AAP monotherapy in adults with bipolar depression. METHODS: Efficacy measures included change in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Improvement - Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), response, and remission. Multiple tolerability outcomes were examined. Results from random effects models were reported as difference in change from baseline for continuous variables or odds ratios for dichotomous variables. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the curve cumulative ranking probabilities. Number needed to treat (NNT) and harm (NNH) were calculated. RESULTS: Eighteen RCT's met inclusion criteria of the systematic literature review. On change in MADRS, lurasidone (- 4.71 [95% Crl - 6.98, - 2.41]), quetiapine (- 4.80 [- 5.93, - 3.72]), olanzapine (- 4.57 [- 5.92, - 3.20]), and cariprazine (- 2.29 [- 3.47, - 1.09]) were more efficacious than placebo. Lurasidone was associated with a significantly greater odds of response (≥50% improvement in MADRS) compared to cariprazine (1.78 [95% Crl 1.08, 2.77]), aripiprazole (2.38 [1.38, 3.85]), and ziprasidone (2.47 [1.41, 3.98]), but was similar to olanzapine (1.68 [0.99,2.65]) and quetiapine (1.25 [0.78, 1.90]). For change in CGI-BP-S-overall score, lurasidone was significantly better than cariprazine (- 0.38 [95% Crl - 0.66,-0.10]) and ziprasidone (- 0.58 [- 0.91,-0.26]), but similar to quetiapine (- 0.08 [- 0.36, 0.19])and olanzapine (- 0.04 [- 1.41, 1.46]). Lurasidone (0.34 kg [95% Crl - 0.22, 0.89]) and aripiprazole (0.20 kg [- 0.59, 1.00]) had a similar weight change compared to placebo, but olanzapine (2.88 kg [2.40, 3.36]), quetiapine (1.17 kg [0.84, 1.49]), and cariprazine (0.65 kg [0.34, 0.96]) were associated with greater weight gain. The NNT for response was the lowest for lurasidone (NNT = 5) followed by quetiapine (NNT = 6), olanzapine (NNT = 10) and cariprazine (NNT = 12). CONCLUSIONS: In this NMA in adults with bipolar depression, which evaluated change in depressive symptoms (assessed by MADRS) across short-term trials, the largest improvement versus placebo was observed for lurasidone, olanzapine and quetiapine with cariprazine, showing a smaller treatment effect. Aripiprazole and ziprasidone were ineffective for the treatment of bipolar depression. Improvement in CGI-BP-S score for lurasidone was larger than cariprazine and ziprasidone but similar to quetiapine and olanzapine. Based on short term studies lurasidone and aripiprazole had similar weight gain compared to placebo.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone in acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia: A 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in acute schizophrenia in Japan and other countries. METHODS: Subjects (aged 18-74 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia were randomized to lurasidone 40 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at Week 6. Secondary efficacy assessments included the Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S). Safety endpoints included adverse events, and laboratory and electrocardiogram parameters. RESULTS: A total of 483 subjects were randomized to lurasidone or placebo; 107 subjects were from Japan. Mean changes from baseline at Week 6 endpoint in PANSS total scores were -19.3 in the lurasidone group and -12.7 in the placebo group (treatment difference: P < 0.001, effect size = 0.41). Changes from baseline for Week 6 CGI-S scores were -1.0 for lurasidone and -0.7 for placebo (treatment difference: P < 0.001, effect size = 0.41). All-cause discontinuation during the 6-week, double-blind period was 19.4% for lurasidone and 25.4% for placebo, and discontinuation rates due to adverse event were 5.7% for lurasidone and 6.4% for placebo. The following common treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in more than 2% on lurasidone and at a rate at least twice that of the placebo group: akathisia (4.0%), dizziness (2.8%), somnolence (2.8%), abdominal discomfort (2.0%) and asthenia (2.0%). No significant changes in bodyweight or metabolic parameters were observed. CONCLUSION: Lurasidone 40 mg once daily dosing demonstrated efficacy in a patient population with acute schizophrenia, including subjects from Japan, and was generally safe and well-tolerated.

A propensity score matching analysis for cardio metabolic risk of antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia using Japanese claims data.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the cardio-metabolic risk in schizophrenia patients treated by atypical antipsychotic drugs compared with that in those treated without atypical antipsychotic drugs using a nationwide insurance claims database and medical examination database in Japan. METHODS: Eligible patients were defined as those meeting the following two criteria: (i) A diagnosis of schizophrenia (ICD-10 code: F20) was made between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2017, with data available for at least 6 months before the diagnosis was made (index month), and (ii) health check-up data were available within ±3 months of the index month. The primary endpoint was changes in cardio-metabolic risk based on the Suita score at 1 year, and the secondary endpoints were changes in medical examination data related to cardio-metabolic risk (total cholesterol [TC], triglyceride, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, body mass index [BMI], and hemoglobin A1c) at 1 year. The primary endpoint was evaluated by multivariate analysis, with the cumulative chlorpromazine equivalent amount and the baseline Suita score added as covariates. RESULTS: One-hundred eighty five pairs of propensity score (PS)-matched patients were evaluated. Patients receiving atypical antipsychotic drugs exhibited a greater change in the Suita score and a risk of coronary heart disease based on the Suita score of 0.530 and 0.098%, respectively, than patients not receiving atypical antipsychotic drugs, but there was no significant difference (p = 0.412 and 0.610). The significant changes in TC and BMI were determined as 6.525 mg/dL and 0.380 kg/m2 greater, respectively, in patients treated with atypical antipsychotic drugs (p = 0.037 and 0.011). CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant increases in changes in the Suita score at 1 year by treatment with atypical antipsychotic drugs compared with treatment without atypical antipsychotic drugs. However, the TC and BMI were significantly higher in patients treated with atypical antipsychotic drugs.

Effect of prior depression diagnosis on bipolar disorder outcomes: A retrospective cohort study using a medical claims database.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder often emerges from depressive episodes and is initially diagnosed as depression. This study aimed to explore the effects of a prior depression diagnosis on outcomes in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder. METHODS: This cohort study analyzed data of patients aged 18-64 years who received a new bipolar disorder diagnosis in Japan, using medical claims data from January 2005 to October 2020 provided by JMDC, Inc. The index month was defined as the time of the bipolar diagnosis. The study assessed the incidence of psychiatric hospitalization, all-cause hospitalization, and mortality, stratified by the presence of a preceding depression diagnosis and its duration (≥1 or <1 year). Hazard ratios (HRs) and p-values were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models, adjusted for potential confounders, and supported by log-rank tests. RESULTS: Of the 5595 patients analyzed, 2460 had a history of depression, with 1049 experiencing it for over a year and 1411 for less than a year. HRs for psychiatric hospitalization, all hospitalizations, and death in patients with a history of depression versus those without were 0.92 (95% CI = 0.78-1.08, p = 0.30), 0.87 (95% CI = 0.78-0.98, p = 0.017), and 0.61 (95% CI = 0.33-1.12, p = 0.11), respectively. In patients with preceding depression ≥1 year versus <1 year, HRs were 0.89 (95% CI = 0.67-1.19, p = 0.43) for psychiatric hospitalization, 0.85 (95% CI = 0.71-1.00, p = 0.052) for all hospitalizations, and 0.25 (95% CI = 0.07-0.89, p = 0.03) for death. CONCLUSION: A prior history and duration of depression may not elevate psychiatric hospitalization risk after bipolar disorder diagnosis and might even correlate with reduced hospitalization and mortality rates.

Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis: Efficacy and Safety of Second-Generation Antipsychotics in Youths With Bipolar Depression.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the relative efficacy and safety of second-generation antipsychotics for treating major depressive episodes in youths with bipolar disorder. METHOD: A systematic literature review using PRISMA guidelines and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of second-generation antipsychotics for bipolar depression in youths 10 to 18 years of age was conducted. Efficacy measures included Children's Depression Rating Scale, Revised (CDRS-R) and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Disorder-Severity Depression (CGI-BP-S-depression) and Overall (CGI-BP-S-overall) scores. Available safety outcomes included discontinuations (all-cause, lack of efficacy, adverse events), metabolic parameters (weight change, cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose), changes in prolactin, and somnolence. Results from the NMA were reported as mean changes from baseline or odds ratios (OR) with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). RESULTS: Four RCTs comparing placebo to lurasidone, quetiapine (1 each for immediate- and extended-release), and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC) met all of the inclusion criteria. Lurasidone and OFC demonstrated similar and statistically significant improvements in CDRS-R, but quetiapine did not (lurasidone: -5.70 [-8.66, -2.76]; OFC: -5.01 [-8.63, -1.38]; quetiapine: -1.85 [-5.99, 2.27]). Lurasidone was associated with smaller changes in weight, cholesterol, and triglycerides from baseline compared to OFC and quetiapine. There were no differences in changes in glucose levels among antipsychotics. In addition, lurasidone was associated with smaller change in prolactin levels compared to OFC but not quetiapine. CONCLUSION: Evidence from 4 studies in this NMA indicated that lurasidone and OFC, but not quetiapine, were efficacious for the treatment of bipolar depression in youths. Lurasidone was associated with less weight gain and smaller impacts on cholesterol and triglycerides compared with quetiapine and OFC.

Impact of bipolar disorder on health-related quality of life and work productivity: Estimates from the national health and wellness survey in Japan.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that bipolar disorder (BD) patients frequently present with difficulties in interpersonal relationships, education or employment and suffer poorer quality of life. This study aimed to estimate the impact of BD on health-related quality of life (HRQOL), work productivity loss and indirect costs. METHODS: Data was from the online, self-administered 2019 National Health and Wellness Survey. Outcomes were compared for those who self-reported a physician diagnosis of BD (N=179), major depressive disorder (MDD, N=1,549) and controls who have never experienced BD, MDD and schizophrenia (N=27,485). RESULTS: The lifetime prevalence was estimated to be 0.60% for BD and 5.16% for MDD. Significantly lower Mental Component Summary (MCS), Role Component Summary (RCS) scores and EuroQol 5-dimension scale (EQ-5D-5L) summary index and significantly higher presenteeism, total work productivity impairment and activity impairment assessed by Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire and indirect costs for BD versus controls and BD PHQ-9≥10 versus PHQ-9<10 were observed. Compared to MDD patients, BD patients had significantly lower RCS score and greater work productivity loss and activity impairment. The national morbidity cost of BD in Japan was estimated to be Japanese yen 1,236 billion using a human-capital approach. LIMITATIONS: The data used were self-reported and is cross-sectional in nature, thus causal relationship cannot be assumed. CONCLUSION: BD patients and those with severe depressive symptoms experience significantly poorer HRQOL and greater work productivity loss and indirect costs. These findings highlight the importance of proper screening, diagnosis and treatment of BD and bipolar depression.

Association Between Cardiovascular Risk Factors and Cognitive Impairment in People With Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Importance: Schizophrenia is associated with cognitive dysfunction and cardiovascular risk factors, including metabolic syndrome (MetS) and its constituent criteria. Cognitive dysfunction and cardiovascular risk factors can worsen cognition in the general population and may contribute to cognitive impairment in schizophrenia. Objective: To study the association between cognitive dysfunction and cardiovascular risk factors and cognitive impairment in individuals with schizophrenia. Data Sources: A search was conducted of Embase, Scopus, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane databases from inception to February 25, 2020, using terms that included synonyms of schizophrenia AND metabolic adversities AND cognitive function. Conference proceedings, clinical trial registries, and reference lists of relevant publications were also searched. Study Selection: Studies were included that (1) examined cognitive functioning in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder; (2) investigated the association of cardiovascular disease risk factors, including MetS, diabetes, obesity, overweight, obesity or overweight, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and insulin resistance with outcomes; and (3) compared cognitive performance of patients with schizophrenia/schizoaffective disorder between those with vs without cardiovascular disease risk factors. Data Extraction and Synthesis: Extraction of data was conducted by 2 to 3 independent reviewers per article. Data were meta-analyzed using a random-effects model. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was global cognition, defined as a test score using clinically validated measures of overall cognitive functioning. Results: Twenty-seven studies involving 10 174 individuals with schizophrenia were included. Significantly greater global cognitive deficits were present in patients with schizophrenia who had MetS (13 studies; n = 2800; effect size [ES] = 0.31; 95% CI, 0.13-0.50; P = .001), diabetes (8 studies; n = 2976; ES = 0.32; 95% CI, 0.23-0.42; P < .001), or hypertension (5 studies; n = 1899; ES = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.31; P < .001); nonsignificantly greater deficits were present in patients with obesity (8 studies; n = 2779; P = .20), overweight (8 studies; n = 2825; P = .41), and insulin resistance (1 study; n = 193; P = .18). Worse performance in specific cognitive domains was associated with cognitive dysfunction and cardiovascular risk factors regarding 5 domains in patients with diabetes (ES range, 0.23 [95% CI, 0.12-0.33] to 0.40 [95% CI, 0.20-0.61]) and 4 domains with MetS (ES range, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.03-0.28] to 0.40 [95% CI, 0.20-0.61]) and hypertension (ES range, 0.15 [95% CI, 0.04-0.26] to 0.27 [95% CI, 0.15-0.39]). Conclusions and Relevance: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, MetS, diabetes, and hypertension were significantly associated with global cognitive impairment in people with schizophrenia.

Rehospitalization Risk of Receptor-Affinity Profile in Antipsychotic Drug Treatment: A Propensity Score Matching Analysis Using a Japanese Employment-Based Health Insurance Database.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to examine whether there is a difference in the risk of rehospitalization when antipsychotics are classified into two groups treated using drugs with a higher or lower affinity to H1 or α1 receptors than to D2 receptors (histamine H1 receptors, adrenaline α1 receptors [HA] high- and HA low-affinity drug group, respectively) based on affinity to receptors related to sedation using a nationwide insurance claims database in Japan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We identified eligible patients by the following two criteria: (i) hospitalization due to schizophrenia (International Classification of Disease [ICD]-10 code: F20 or F25) in psychiatric wards between January 1st, 2005 and August 31st, 2017, and (ii) administration of HA high- or HA low-affinity drugs in the next month after discharge from the earliest hospitalization due to schizophrenia (index month). The primary endpoint was rehospitalization due to schizophrenia. The secondary endpoints were (i) involuntary rehospitalization, (ii) concomitant use of anxiolytics/hypnotics, mood stabilizers, and antiparkinsonian drugs, (iii) all-cause death, and (iv) medication discontinuation. Propensity score (PS) matching analysis was applied, and the hazard ratio (HR) of the event rate in the HA high-affinity drug group relative to the HA low-affinity drug group was calculated using Cox's proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Two thousand nine hundred and forty patients were identified as eligible patients. Among PS-matched patients (819 in each group), the HR in the HA high-affinity drug group compared with the HA low-affinity drug group was 1.018 (0.822-1.260, P = 0.870). Other outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: No significant difference was observed in the rehospitalization risk due to schizophrenia associated with HA high-affinity antipsychotic drugs. Although this study was a retrospective PS-matched cohort study, the possibility of masking of the rehospitalization risk cannot be excluded because more than 80% of the patients were administered an anxiolytic/hypnotic at the time of admission.

Efficacy, tolerability, and safety of lurasidone for acute schizophrenia: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase 3 trials in Japan.

INTRODUCTION: Considering that the efficacy results of the Japan lurasidone phase 3 trials for acute schizophrenia were inconsistent, we conducted a systematic review and a random-effect model network meta-analysis of those trials to examine whether lurasidone was beneficial for the treatment of Japanese patients with acute schizophrenia. METHODS: The study included the double-blind, randomized trial in Japan that included patients with acute schizophrenia. Efficacy outcomes were improvement of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score (PANSS-T, primary), positive (PANSS-P), negative (PANSS-N), and general (PANSS-G) subscale scores; and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale (CGI-S) score and response rate. Other outcomes were discontinuation rates and incidence of individual adverse events. RESULTS: We included four studies (n = 1,608). Although both lurasidone 40 mg/d (LUR40) and 80 mg/d (LUR80) outperformed placebo in PANSS-T [standardized mean difference (95% credible interval): LUR40 = -0.298 (-0.420, -0.176), LUR80 = -0.170 (-0.320, -0.019)], PANSS-P, and CGI-S scores, LUR40 but not LUR80 outperformed placebo in PANSS-N and PANSS-G scores and response rate. LUR40 outperformed LUR80 regarding PANSS-G score. Both LUR40 and LUR80 were associated with a higher incidence of akathisia, somnolence, and increased body weight compared with placebo. Compared with placebo, LUR40 was associated with a higher incidence of weight gain (≥7%), and LUR80 was associated with a higher incidence of dystonia and weight loss (≥7%) and higher Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale score. CONCLUSIONS: Both LUR40 and LUR80 improved overall symptoms in Japanese patients with acute schizophrenia. However, LUR80 seemed to have a risk of extrapyramidal symptoms.