Genome-wide association study meta-analysis of suicide death and suicidal behavior.

Suicide is a worldwide health crisis. We aimed to identify genetic risk variants associated with suicide death and suicidal behavior. Meta-analysis for suicide death was performed using 3765 cases from Utah and matching 6572 controls of European ancestry. Meta-analysis for suicidal behavior using data across five cohorts (n = 8315 cases and 256,478 psychiatric or populational controls of European ancestry) was also performed. One locus in neuroligin 1 (NLGN1) passing the genome-wide significance threshold for suicide death was identified (top SNP rs73182688, with p = 5.48 × 10-8 before and p = 4.55 × 10-8 after mtCOJO analysis conditioning on MDD to remove genetic effects on suicide mediated by MDD). Conditioning on suicidal attempts did not significantly change the association strength (p = 6.02 × 10-8), suggesting suicide death specificity. NLGN1 encodes a member of a family of neuronal cell surface proteins. Members of this family act as splice site-specific ligands for beta-neurexins and may be involved in synaptogenesis. The NRXN-NLGN pathway was previously implicated in suicide, autism, and schizophrenia. We additionally identified ROBO2 and ZNF28 associations with suicidal behavior in the meta-analysis across five cohorts in gene-based association analysis using MAGMA. Lastly, we replicated two loci including variants near SOX5 and LOC101928519 associated with suicidal attempts identified in the ISGC and MVP meta-analysis using the independent FinnGen samples. Suicide death and suicidal behavior showed positive genetic correlations with depression, schizophrenia, pain, and suicidal attempt, and negative genetic correlation with educational attainment. These correlations remained significant after conditioning on depression, suggesting pleiotropic effects among these traits. Bidirectional generalized summary-data-based Mendelian randomization analysis suggests that genetic risk for the suicidal attempt and suicide death are both bi-directionally causal for MDD.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Multicenter, Noninferiority Study Comparing Paliperidone Palmitate 6-Month Versus the 3-Month Long-Acting Injectable in Patients With Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind (DB), randomized, parallel-group study was designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 6-month (PP6M) formulation relative to paliperidone palmitate 3-month (PP3M) formulation in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: Following screening, patients entered an open-label (OL) maintenance phase and received 1 injection cycle of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M; 100 or 150 mg eq.) or PP3M (350 or 525 mg eq.). Clinically stable patients were randomized (2:1) to receive PP6M (700 or 1000 mg eq., gluteal injections) or PP3M (350 or 525 mg eq.) in a 12-month DB phase; 2 doses of PP6M (corresponding to doses of PP1M and PP3M) were chosen. RESULTS: Overall, 1036 patients were screened, 838 entered the OL phase, and 702 (mean age: 40.8 years) were randomized (PP6M: 478; PP3M: 224); 618 (88.0%) patients completed the DB phase (PP6M: 416 [87.0%]; PP3M: 202 [90.2%]). Relapse rates were PP6M, 7.5% (n = 36) and PP3M, 4.9% (n = 11). The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the difference (95% CI) between treatment groups (PP6M - PP3M) in the percentages of patients who remained relapse free was -2.9% (-6.8%, 1.1%), thus meeting noninferiority criteria (95% CI lower bound is larger than the pre-specified noninferiority margin of -10%). Secondary efficacy endpoints corroborated the primary analysis. Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between PP6M (62.1%) and PP3M (58.5%). No new safety concerns emerged. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of a twice-yearly dosing regimen of PP6M was noninferior to that of PP3M in preventing relapse in patients with schizophrenia adequately treated with PP1M or PP3M. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials.gov identifier: NCT03345342.

Impact on carer burden when stable patients with schizophrenia transitioned from 1-monthly to 3-monthly paliperidone palmitate.

RATIONALE: Reducing the frequency of long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication may reduce carer burden. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the impact of reduced frequency of long-acting injectable antipsychotic medication on carer burden in stable patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: Carer burden was assessed using the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire (IEQ) within a 52-week, prospective, single-arm, non-randomised, open-label, international, multicentre study evaluating the impact of transitioning stable patients with schizophrenia to paliperidone palmitate 3-monthly (PP3M) from paliperidone palmitate 1-monthly (PP1M). RESULTS: 159 carers completed the IEQ (mean [standard deviation, SD] age: 54.8 [12.8] years); 52.2% were the patients' parent and > 50% had >32 h/week of patient contact. At baseline, mean [SD] IEQ total score was in the lower range (23.8 [12.6]), reflecting patient stabilisation. At last observation carried forward (LOCF) endpoint, the IEQ total score decreased by a mean (95% CI) of -4.0 (-5.9, -2.1), indicating a significant overall reduction in carer burden (P < 0.0001). The six IEQ items with the highest carer burden at baseline were within the urging and worrying domains, in which burden was significantly improved at LOCF endpoint (P < 0.0001). Exploratory analyses found that higher carer burden was associated with lower functional remission (Personal and Social Performance score >70) at baseline and LOCF endpoint, and with the patient being part of the carer's household. Shorter disease duration correlated with better general health of carers at LOCF endpoint. CONCLUSION: Reducing the frequency of antipsychotic medication administration in stable patients with schizophrenia by switching from PP1M to PP3M may reduce carer burden.

Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Characterization of Relapse Risk for Paliperidone Palmitate 1-Month and 3-Month Formulations.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) models were developed to describe the relationship between the time course of paliperidone plasma concentrations and the risk of relapse of schizophrenia symptoms following administration of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) and 3-month (PP3M) long-acting injectables, and to identify relevant covariates for relapse and dropout events. METHODS: Patient data from two global phase 3, relapse prevention studies comparing PP3M to placebo (study A) and PP3M to PP1M (study B) were analyzed. Dropout and relapse data were assessed using survival analysis as two separate single time-to-event models. Baseline covariates included age, sex, race/country, duration of illness, previous hospitalizations, prior use of long-acting injectables and use of multiple (≥2) antipsychotics at screening. RESULTS: The PK/PD analysis data set included 305 patients who were randomized to receive PP3M or placebo in the double-blind phase of study A and 1002 patients randomized to receive PP3M or PP1M in the double-blind phase of study B. Risk of relapse decreased with increasing paliperidone concentrations for both PP1M and PP3M, while it appeared to increase in patients with higher number of previous hospitalizations and/or with higher prerandomization (trough) paliperidone concentration (study A), and in patients on concomitant benzodiazepine medication and/or at Japan centers (study B). These findings are reflective of different illness severity in the population and of differences in medical practice for Japanese patients. In model-based simulations, PP3M and PP1M displayed similar relapse rates over time. CONCLUSIONS: This PK/PD analysis confirmed that PP1M and PP3M provide comparable efficacy in terms of relapse prevention, and that PP3M is superior to placebo. The PK/PD models presented here may as well be applied to studies with similar designs as either study A or B.

Maintenance dose conversion between oral risperidone and paliperidone palmitate 1 month: Practical guidance based on pharmacokinetic simulations.

AIM: We assessed the dosage strengths of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) long-acting injectable resulting in similar steady-state (SS) exposures to the dosage strengths of oral risperidone using pharmacokinetic (PK) simulations. METHODS: Population PK simulations of SS PK were performed using the PK models of oral risperidone and PP1M. The concentrations of active moiety (risperidone + paliperidone) from risperidone were compared to paliperidone concentrations resulting from PP1M administration. Similarity was assessed via graphical evaluation of median and 90% prediction intervals of SS PK profiles over 28 days. RESULTS: Oral risperidone doses of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 mg/d are expected to result in similar SS PK as PP1M doses of 25, 50, 75, 100, and 150 mg eq. (which correspond to 39, 78, 117, 156, and 234 mg of paliperidone palmitate) respectively (ie 25-fold dose conversion factor from oral risperidone to PP1M). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clinicians with a practical guidance to establish suitable maintenance dose levels of PP1M and oral risperidone when transitioning patients from one formulation to another.

Genome-wide association study of paliperidone efficacy.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical response to the atypical antipsychotic paliperidone is known to vary among schizophrenic patients. We carried out a genome-wide association study to identify common genetic variants predictive of paliperidone efficacy. METHODS: We leveraged a collection of 1390 samples from individuals of European ancestry enrolled in 12 clinical studies investigating the efficacy of the extended-release tablet paliperidone ER (n1=490) and the once-monthly injection paliperidone palmitate (n2=550 and n3=350). We carried out a genome-wide association study using a general linear model (GLM) analysis on three separate cohorts, followed by meta-analysis and using a mixed linear model analysis on all samples. The variations in response explained by each single nucleotide polymorphism (hSNP) were estimated. RESULTS: No SNP passed genome-wide significance in the GLM-based analyses with suggestive signals from rs56240334 [P=7.97×10 for change in the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity (CGI-S); P=8.72×10 for change in the total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)] in the intron of ADCK1. The mixed linear model-based association P-values for rs56240334 were consistent with the results from GLM-based analyses and the association with change in CGI-S (P=4.26×10) reached genome-wide significance (i.e. P<5×10). We also found suggestive evidence for a polygenic contribution toward paliperidone treatment response with estimates of heritability, hSNP, ranging from 0.31 to 0.43 for change in the total PANSS score, the PANSS positive Marder factor score, and CGI-S. CONCLUSION: Genetic variations in the ADCK1 gene may differentially predict paliperidone efficacy in schizophrenic patients. However, this finding should be replicated in additional samples.

Efficacy and Safety of Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Formulation for Patients with Schizophrenia: A Randomized, Multicenter, Double-Blind, Noninferiority Study.

BACKGROUND: This double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter, phase-3 study was designed to test the noninferiority of paliperidone palmitate 3-month formulation (PP3M) to the currently marketed 1-month formulation (PP1M) in patients (age 18-70 years) with schizophrenia, previously stabilized on PP1M. METHODS: After screening (≤3 weeks) and a 17-week, flexible-dosed, open-label phase (PP1M: day 1 [150mg eq. deltoid], day 8 [100mg eq. deltoid.], weeks 5, 9, and 13 [50, 75, 100, or 150mg eq., deltoid/gluteal]), clinically stable patients were randomized (1:1) to PP3M (fixed-dose, 175, 263, 350, or 525mg eq. deltoid/gluteal) or PP1M (fixed-dose, 50, 75, 100, or 150mg eq. deltoid/gluteal) for a 48-week double-blind phase. RESULTS: Overall, 1016/1429 open-label patients entered the double-blind phase (PP3M: n=504; PP1M: n=512) and 842 completed it (including patients with relapse). PP3M was noninferior to PP1M: relapse rates were similar in both groups (PP3M: n=37, 8%; PP1M: n=45, 9%; difference in relapse-free rate: 1.2% [95% CI:-2.7%; 5.1%]) based on Kaplan-Meier estimates (primary efficacy). Secondary endpoint results (changes from double-blind baseline in positive and negative symptom score total and subscale scores, Clinical Global Impression-Severity, and Personal and Social Performance scores) were consistent with primary endpoint results. No clinically relevant differences were observed in pharmacokinetic exposures between PP3M and PP1M. Both groups had similar tolerability profiles; increased weight was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (double-blind phase; 21% each). No new safety signals were detected. CONCLUSION: Taken together, PP3M with its 3-month dosing interval is a unique option for relapse prevention in schizophrenia.

Prospective dose selection and acceleration of paliperidone palmitate 3-month formulation development using a pharmacometric bridging strategy.

AIMS: To prospectively select the dose of the paliperidone palmitate 3-month (PP3M) formulation, using a pharmacometric bridging strategy based on the paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) formulation previously approved for schizophrenia treatment. METHODS: Pharmacokinetic (PK) data from a 6-month interim analysis of a single dose PP3M Phase I clinical trial was integrated with a previously developed PP1M population-PK model. The model was updated to incorporate formulation as a covariate on absorption parameters and to explore the most critical design element of the Phase III study: the PP1M-to-PP3M dose multiplier for patients switching formulations. Plasma paliperidone concentrations were measured at predetermined intervals during Phase III, enabling comparison of the multiple-dose PK between PP1M and PP3M. Exposure matching was assessed graphically to determine whether paliperidone plasma concentrations from the two formulations overlapped. RESULTS: Prospective steady-state PK simulations revealed that a 3.5 multiple of the PP1M dose would yield a corresponding PP3M dose with comparable exposure. The prospective pharmacometric simulation and observed Phase III PK data agreed closely. Phase III results confirmed the hypothesis that efficacy of PP3M was noninferior to that of PP1M. The similarity in exposures between the two formulations was likely a key determinant of the equivalent efficacy between the two products observed in the Phase III study. CONCLUSIONS: Successful prospective PP3M Phase III clinical trial dose selection was achieved through the use of pharmacometric bridging, without conducting a Phase II study and using only limited Phase I data for PP3M. We estimate that this strategy reduced development time by 3-5 years and may be applicable to other drug development projects.

Large-scale candidate gene study to identify genetic risk factors predictive of paliperidone treatment response in patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Clinical response to antipsychotic medications can vary markedly in patients with schizophrenia. Identifying genetic variants associated with treatment response could help optimize patient care and outcome. To this end, we carried out a large-scale candidate gene study to identify genetic risk factors predictive of paliperidone efficacy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A central nervous system custom chip containing single nucleotide polymorphisms from 1204 candidate genes was utilized to genotype a discovery cohort of 684 schizophrenia patients from four clinical studies of paliperidone extended-release and paliperidone palmitate. Variants predictive of paliperidone efficacy were identified and further tested in four independent replication cohorts of schizophrenic patients (N=2856). RESULTS: We identified an SNP in ERBB4 that may contribute toward differential treatment response to paliperidone. The association trended in the same direction as the discovery cohort in two of the four replication cohorts, but ultimately did not survive multiple testing corrections. The association was not replicated in the other two independent cohorts. We also report several SNPs in well-known schizophrenia candidate genes that show suggestive associations with paliperidone efficacy. CONCLUSION: These preliminary findings suggest that genetic variation in the ERBB4 gene may differentially affect treatment response to paliperidone in individuals with schizophrenia. They implicate the neuregulin 1 (NRG1)-ErbB4 pathway for modulating antipsychotic response. However, these findings were not robustly reproduced in replication cohorts.

Model-Informed Clinical Development of Once-Every-6-Month Injection of Paliperidone Palmitate in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Pharmacometric Bridging Approach (Part I).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A model-informed drug development (MIDD) approach was implemented for paliperidone palmitate (PP) 6-month (PP6M) clinical development, using pharmacokinetics and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model-based simulations. METHODS: PP6M pharmacokinetics were simulated by extending the PP 3-month (PP3M) pharmacokinetic model to account for increased injection volume, and hence dose. Contribution of the MIDD approach to the design of the pivotal PP6M phase-3 study (PP6M/PP3M noninferiority study, NCT03345342) investigating schizophrenia relapse rates was twofold: (1) PP6M dose selection, and (2) hypothesis generation that lower trough concentrations (Ctrough) associated with PP6M, relative to PP3M, were not associated with lower efficacy, which was to be evaluated in the phase-3 study. Moreover, accompanied by an intense sampling scheme to adequately characterize paliperidone pharmacokinetics and to elucidate the potential relationship between concentration and safety/efficacy, the bridging strategy eliminated the need for additional phase-1/phase-2 clinical studies. RESULTS: Using a MIDD bridging strategy, PP6M doses were selected that, compared with PP3M, were expected to have a similar range of exposures and a noninferior relapse rate and safety profile. Clinical data from PP6M/PP3M noninferiority study confirmed that PP6M, compared with PP3M, had a similar range of exposures (T'jollyn et al. in Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 2024), as well as a noninferior relapse rate and safety profile (this manuscript). CONCLUSIONS: Consistency of the MIDD approach with observed clinical outcomes confirmed the hypothesis that lower Ctrough did not lead to increased relapse rates at the doses administered. Although higher paliperidone peak concentrations are achieved with corresponding doses of PP6M relative to PP3M in the phase-3 clinical study, types and incidences of treatment-related adverse events were comparable between PP6M and PP3M groups and no new safety concerns emerged for PP6M (Najarian et al. in Int J Neuropsychopharmacol 25(3):238-251, 2022).

Model-Informed Clinical Development of 6-Monthly Injection of Paliperidone Palmitate in Patients with Schizophrenia: Dosing Strategies Guided by Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling and Simulation (Part II).

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Paliperidone palmitate 6-month (PP6M) intramuscular (IM) injection is the longest-acting treatment available for patients with schizophrenia. A population pharmacokinetic (popPK) modeling and simulation approach was deployed to inform dosing strategies for PP6M. METHODS: The extensive analysis database included 15,932 paliperidone samples from 700 patients receiving gluteal paliperidone palmitate 3-month (PP3M) or PP6M injections in the double-blind phase of a phase-3 noninferiority study (NCT03345342). Exposure parameters for paliperidone appeared to increase dose-proportionally within each dosing schedule (PP3M/PP6M). The range of paliperidone exposures after IM administration of PP6M overlaps with that of corresponding doses of oral paliperidone extended release, PP 1-month (PP1M), and PP3M. Model-based simulations were performed to investigate paliperidone exposures in different PP6M dosing scenarios and relevant subpopulations. RESULTS: A dosing window of ≤ 2 weeks earlier and ≤ 3 weeks later than the target 6-month interval for maintenance treatment with PP6M dosing maintains paliperidone exposures at levels that are not expected to substantially impact its safety and efficacy. For missed-dose scenarios, tailored re-initiation regimens are proposed that should be applied before resuming PP6M maintenance dosing. Regarding subpopulations, PP6M 700 mg eq. is the highest dose recommended in mild renal-impairment patients; the paliperidone pharmacokinetics after PP6M administration is not affected by sex, body mass index, or age in a clinically meaningful way. CONCLUSION: Paliperidone concentration-time profiles after PP6M and PP3M dosing were adequately described by the popPK model. Model-based simulation results provide guidance for clinicians on initiating PP6M therapy, transitioning between paliperidone formulations, the dosing windows to use for maintenance dosing, and managing missed PP6M doses.

Risk of cardiovascular morbidity with risperidone or paliperidone treatment: analysis of 64 randomized, double-blind trials.

A post hoc analysis of the risperidone (RIS)/paliperidone (Pali) clinical trials database comprising 64 studies was conducted. Risk of sudden death, cardiovascular (CV), and cerebrovascular events during RIS or Pali treatment was estimated. Treatment emergent CV adverse events were identified using 7 prespecified Standardised MedDRA Queries as follows: embolic/thrombotic events, cerebrovascular disorders, ischemic heart disease, cardiac arrhythmias, cardiac failure, torsades/QT prolongation, and convulsions. Risk in the RIS/Pali pooled group was significantly increased compared to placebo for the following adverse events: syncope, tachycardia, palpitations, edema peripheral, dysarthria, and transient ischemic attack. Incidence of death related to CV events was low and similar across groups. Consistent with the known pharmacologic profile and product information, this analysis of treatment emergent adverse event data from a large, randomized, controlled clinical trials database described increased risk versus placebo for several specific CV events. Apart from events described in existing product labeling, no new safety findings emerged.

Long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate versus oral paliperidone extended release: a comparative analysis from two placebo-controlled relapse prevention studies.

BACKGROUND: Increasing availability and use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics have generated a need to compare these formulations with their oral equivalents; however, a paucity of relevant data is available. METHODS: This post hoc comparison of the long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of maintenance treatment with paliperidone palmitate (PP) versus oral paliperidone extended release (ER) used data from two similarly designed, randomised, double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled schizophrenia relapse prevention trials. Assessments included measures of time to relapse, symptom changes/functioning and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Time to relapse between treatment groups was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazards model. Between-group differences for continuous variables for change scores during the DB phase were assessed using analysis of co-variance models. Categorical variables were evaluated using Chi-square and Fisher's exact tests. No adjustment was made for multiplicity. RESULTS: Approximately 45% of enrolled subjects in both trials were stabilised and randomised to the DB relapse prevention phase. Risk of relapse was higher in subjects treated with paliperidone ER than in those treated with PP [paliperidone ER/PP hazard ratio (HR), 2.52; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.46-4.35; p < 0.001]. Similarly, risk of relapse after withdrawal of paliperidone ER treatment (placebo group of the paliperidone ER study) was higher than after withdrawal of PP (paliperidone ER placebo/PP placebo HR, 2.25; 95% CI, 1.59-3.18; p < 0.001). Stabilised schizophrenic subjects treated with PP maintained functioning demonstrated by the same proportions of subjects with mild to no difficulties in functioning at DB baseline and end point [Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scale total score >70, both approximately 58.5%; p = 1.000] compared with a 10.9% decrease for paliperidone ER (58.5% vs 47.6%, respectively; p = 0.048). The least squares mean change for Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at DB end point in these previously stabilised subjects was 3.5 points in favour of PP (6.0 vs 2.5; p = 0.025). The rates of TEAEs and AEs of interest appeared similar. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis supports maintenance of effect with the injectable compared with the oral formulation of paliperidone in patients with schizophrenia. The safety profile of PP was similar to that of paliperidone ER. Future studies are needed to confirm these findings.

The Effect of Longer Dosing Intervals for Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotics on Outcomes in Schizophrenia.

Medication nonadherence in schizophrenia can have serious implications including relapses and hospitalization. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics require fewer administrations, while ensuring sustained medication coverage. In this review, we summarize the expected real-world benefits of longer dosing intervals in the management of schizophrenia. LAIs are associated with improved clinical outcomes of less frequent relapses and reduced functional impairment, encouraging patients to regain control of their lives. Aripiprazole lauroxil and paliperidone palmitate three-monthly (PP3M) LAIs have longer dosing intervals of 2-3 months and provide improved outcomes in patients with schizophrenia. Paliperidone palmitate six-monthly (PP6M) LAI provides the longest dosing interval, twice-yearly dosing, among existing LAIs. Decreasing the frequency of LAI administrations has the potential to reduce occurrence of serious outcomes associated with poor medication adherence. By eliminating the need for daily oral antipsychotic dosing, LAIs could increase the likelihood of patient acceptance, decrease stigma, and promote self-esteem. Longer intervals of medication coverage may be desirable for patients with higher risk of relapse including adults with recent-onset schizophrenia, those living in circumstances that may deprive them of regular access (eg, homeless), those that are in transitions between care settings or to reduce interpersonal contact during public health emergencies (eg, COVID-19 pandemic).

Efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 6-monthly long-acting injectable in reduction of relapses in patients with schizophrenia: An Asian subgroup analysis of phase 3, randomized study.

BACKGROUND: Evaluate efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 6-monthly (PP6M) for patients with schizophrenia in the Asian subgroup of a global, multicenter, noninferiority phase-3 study (NCT03345342). METHODS: Patients received paliperidone palmitate 1-monthly (PP1M, 100/150 mg eq.) or paliperidone palmitate 3-monthly (PP3M, 350/525 mg eq.) during the maintenance phase and entered a 12-month double-blind (DB) phase, wherein they were randomized (2:1) to PP6M (700/1000 mg. eq.) or PP3M (350/525 mg eq.). Subgroup analysis was performed for 90 (12.7%) patients from Asia region (India, Taiwan, Malaysia, Hong Kong, and Korea). Primary endpoint was time-to-relapse during DB phase (Kaplan-Meier estimates). Secondary endpoints were changes from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scale score. RESULTS: In Asian subgroup, 91.9% (82/90) of patients completed DB phase (PP6M: 54/62 [87%]; PP3M: 28/28 [100%]). Median time-to-relapse was "not-estimable" due to low relapse rates in both groups. Estimated difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) between relapse-free patients in PP6M and PP3M groups of Asian subgroup was -0.1% [-8.5%, 8.4%] (global study population: -2.9% [-6.8%, 1.1%]). Mean change from baseline in secondary efficacy parameters was comparable between both groups, similar to the global study population. The incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms was higher in the Asian subgroup than in the global study population. CONCLUSION: Consistent with the global study population, PP6M was noninferior to PP3M in preventing relapse in patients with schizophrenia from the Asia region. Findings suggest the possibility of switching from PP1M/PP3M to twice-yearly PP6M without loss of efficacy and with no unexpected safety concerns.

Efficacy and Safety of Paliperidone Palmitate 6-Month versus Paliperidone Palmitate 3-Month Long-Acting Injectable in European Patients with Schizophrenia: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Global Phase-3 Double-Blind Randomized Non-Inferiority Study.

Purpose: To examine efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate (PP) 6-month (PP6M) vs PP3-month (PP3M) long acting injectable (LAI) in patients with schizophrenia from European sites previously stabilized on PP3M or PP1-month (PP1M). Methods: This post-hoc subgroup analysis used data from a global phase-3 double-blind (DB) randomized non-inferiority study (NCT03345342). Patients were randomized (2:1, respectively) to receive dorsogluteal injections of PP6M (700 mg eq. or 1000 mg eq.) or PP3M (350 mg eq. or 525 mg eq.) in the 12-month DB phase. Primary endpoint was time-to-relapse during the DB phase, using a Kaplan-Meier cumulative survival estimate (non-inferiority margin 95% CI lower bound larger than prespecified as -10%). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs), physical examinations, and laboratory tests were also evaluated. Results: A total of 384 patients who entered the DB phase were included in European sites (PP6M, n = 260; PP3M, n = 124) with a mean age similar in both groups (mean age [SD] years: PP6M, 40.0 [11.39]; PP3M, 38.8 [10.41]). Baseline characteristics were similar across both groups. The number of patients who experienced a relapse during DB phase were PP6M: 18 (6.9%) vs PP3M: 3 (2.4%) with percentage relapse-free difference of -4.9% (95% CI: -9.2%, -0.5%), thus achieving non-inferiority criteria. Secondary efficacy endpoints indicated comparable improvements. Incidence of TEAEs was similar between PP6M (58.8%) and PP3M (54.8%) groups. Nasopharyngitis, headache, increased weight, and injection-site pain were the most common TEAEs. Conclusion: The efficacy of PP6M was non-inferior to that of PP3M in preventing relapse in the European subgroup previously treated with PP1M or PP3M, which was consistent with the global study. No new safety signals were identified.

A randomized trial of paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injectable in schizophrenia.

Paliperidone palmitate (PP) is a recently (USA) approved injectable new-generation antipsychotic. This 53-wk, Phase-III double-blind study was designed to assess the non-inferiority of PP to risperidone long-acting injectable (RIS-LAI) in schizophrenia treatment. Acutely symptomatic patients (n=749), with a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score between 60 and 120 were randomly allocated to gluteal injections of either (a) PP: 50 mg eq. on days 1 and 8, and flexible dosing [25-100 mg eq. (i.e. 39-156 mg USA dosing)] once-monthly; or (b) RIS-LAI: bi-weekly injections of 25 mg on days 8 and 22, and flexible dosing (25-50 mg) starting from day 36, with allowed oral supplementation. Patients (n=747) were 59% men, 92% white, mean (s.d.) age of 41 (11.95) yr and 45% (n=339) completed the study. Mean (s.d.) change from baseline to endpoint in PANSS total score was: -11.6 (21.22) PP; and -14.4 (19.76) RIS-LAI (per-protocol analysis set, primary measure); least-squares means difference was -2.6 (95% CI -5.84 to 0.61), with a prespecified 5-point non-inferiority margin. PP's suboptimal dosing regimen (<150 mg eq. initial dose) resulted in lower median plasma levels of the active moiety in PP-treated vs. RIS-LAI-treated patients. Insomnia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event, with a similar incidence in both groups (15%). PP did not demonstrate comparable efficacy to RIS-LAI, which may be attributable to the initiation dosing strategy employed. Tolerability of both treatments was comparable to previous studies, with no new safety signals detected.