Safety and Efficacy of Nipocalimab in Patients With Generalized Myasthenia Gravis: Results From the Randomized Phase 2 Vivacity-MG Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: To evaluate in a phase 2 study the safety and efficacy of IV nipocalimab, a fully human, antineonatal Fc receptor monoclonal antibody, in patients with generalized myasthenia gravis (gMG). METHODS: Patients with gMG with inadequate response to stable standard-of-care (SOC) therapy were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to receive either IV placebo every 2 weeks (Q2W) or one of 4 IV nipocalimab treatments: 5 mg/kg once every 4 weeks (Q4W), 30 mg/kg Q4W, 60 mg/kg Q2W each for 8 weeks, or a 60 mg/kg single dose, in addition to their background SOC therapy. Infusions (placebo or nipocalimab) were Q2W in all groups to maintain blinding. The primary safety endpoint was incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), including serious adverse events and adverse events of special interest. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to day 57 in Myasthenia Gravis-Activities of Daily Living (MG-ADL) total scores. Dose response of change at day 57 was analyzed with a linear trend test over the placebo, nipocalimab 5 mg/kg Q4W, nipocalimab 30 mg/kg Q4W, and nipocalimab 60 mg/kg Q2W groups. RESULTS: Sixty-eight patients (nipocalimab: n = 54; placebo, n = 14) were randomized; 64 patients (94.1%) were positive for antiacetylcholine receptor autoantibodies, and 4 patients (6%) were positive for antimuscle-specific tyrosine kinase autoantibodies. Fifty-seven patients (83.8%) completed treatment through day 57. The combined nipocalimab group compared with the placebo group demonstrated similar incidences of TEAEs (83.3% vs 78.6%, respectively) and infections (33.3% vs 21.4%, respectively). No deaths or discontinuations due to TEAEs and no TEAEs of special interest (grade ≥3 infection or hypoalbuminemia) were observed with nipocalimab treatment. A statistically significant dose response was observed for change from baseline in MG-ADL at day 57 (p = 0.031, test of linear trend). DISCUSSION: Nipocalimab was generally safe, well-tolerated, and showed evidence of dose-dependent reduction in MG-ADL scores at day 57 in this phase 2 study. These results support further evaluation of nipocalimab for the treatment of gMG. TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Clinical Trials Registration: NCT03772587; first submitted December 10, 2018; EudraCT Number: 2018-002247-28; first submitted November 30, 2018; date of first patient dosed April 10, 2019. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class I evidence that for patients with gMG, nipocalimab was well-tolerated, and it did not significantly improve MG-ADL at any individual dose but demonstrated a significant dose response for improved MG-ADL across doses.

Findings of Efficacy, Safety, and Biomarker Outcomes of Atabecestat in Preclinical Alzheimer Disease: A Truncated Randomized Phase 2b/3 Clinical Trial.

Importance: Atabecestat, a nonselective oral ß-secretase inhibitor, was evaluated in the EARLY trial for slowing cognitive decline in participants with preclinical Alzheimer disease. Preliminary analyses suggested dose-related cognitive worsening and neuropsychiatric adverse events (AEs). Objective: To report efficacy, safety, and biomarker findings in the EARLY trial, both on and off atabecestat treatment, with focus on potential recovery of effects on cognition and behavior. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b/3 study conducted from November 2015 to December 2018 after being stopped prematurely. The study was conducted at 143 centers across 14 countries. Participants were permitted to be followed off-treatment by the original protocol, collecting safety and efficacy data. From 4464 screened participants, 557 amyloid-positive, cognitively normal (Clinical Dementia Rating of 0; aged 60-85 years) participants (approximately 34% of originally planned 1650) were randomized before the trial sponsor stopped enrollment. Interventions: Participants were randomized (1:1:1) to atabecestat, 5 mg (n = 189), 25 mg (n = 183), or placebo (n = 185). Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome: change from baseline in Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite score. Secondary outcomes: change from baseline in the Cognitive Function Index and the Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status total scale score. Safety was monitored throughout the study. Results: Of 557 participants, 341 were women (61.2%); mean (SD) age was 70.4 (5.56) years. In May 2018, study medication was stopped early owing to hepatic-related AEs; participants were followed up off-treatment for 6 months. Atabecestat, 25 mg, showed significant cognitive worsening vs placebo for Preclinical Alzheimer Cognitive Composite at month 6 (least-square mean difference, -1.09; 95% CI, -1.66 to -0.53; P < .001) and month 12 (least-square mean, -1.62; 95% CI, -2.49 to -0.76; P < .001), and at month 3 for Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (least-square mean, -3.70; 95% CI, -5.76 to -1.63; P < .001). Cognitive Function Index participant report showed nonsignificant worsening at month 12. Systemic and neuropsychiatric-related treatment-emergent AEs were greater in atabecestat groups vs placebo. After stopping treatment, follow-up cognitive testing and AE assessment provided evidence of reversibility of drug-induced cognitive worsening and AEs in atabecestat groups. Conclusions and Relevance: Atabecestat treatment was associated with dose-related cognitive worsening as early as 3 months and presence of neuropsychiatric treatment-emergent AEs, with evidence of reversibility after 6 months off treatment. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02569398.

Baseline characteristics and treatment-emergent risk factors associated with cerebrovascular event and death with risperidone in dementia patients.

BACKGROUND: Use of antipsychotics to treat behavioural symptoms of dementia has been associated with increased risks of mortality and stroke. Little is known about individual patient characteristics that might be associated with bad or good outcomes. AIMS: We examined the risperidone clinical trial data to look for individual patient characteristics associated with these adverse outcomes. METHOD: Data from all double-blind randomised controlled trials of risperidone in dementia patients (risperidone n = 1009, placebo n = 712) were included. Associations between characteristics and outcome were analysed based on crude incidences and exposure-adjusted incidence rates, and by time-to-event analyses using Cox proportional hazards regression. Interactions between treatment (risperidone or placebo) and characteristic were analysed with a Cox proportional hazards regression model with main effects for treatment and characteristic in addition to the interaction term. RESULTS: Baseline complications of depression (treatment by risk factor interaction on cerebrovascular adverse event (CVAE) hazard ratio (HR): P = 0.025) and delusions (P = 0.043) were associated with a lower relative risk of CVAE in risperidone-treated patients (HR = 1.47 and 0.54, respectively) compared to not having the complication (HR = 5.88 and 4.16). For mortality, the only significant baseline predictor in patients treated with risperidone was depression, which was associated with a lower relative risk (P<0.001). The relative risk of mortality was increased in risperidone patients treated with anti-inflammatory medications (P = 0.021). CONCLUSIONS: Only anti-inflammatory medications increased mortality risk with risperidone. The reduced risks of CVAE in patients with comorbid depression and delusions, and of mortality with depression, may have clinical implications when weighing the benefits and risks of treatment with risperidone in patients with dementia.

Tapentadol immediate-release for acute postbunionectomy pain: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of tapentadol immediate-release (IR) for treating acute pain following orthopedic bunionectomy surgery in a Taiwanese population. METHODS: This was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group bridging study in which Taiwanese patients (N = 60) with moderate-to-severe pain following bunionectomy were randomized (1:1:1) to receive tapentadol IR 50 or 75 mg or placebo orally every 4-6 hours over a 72 hour period. The primary endpoint was the sum of pain intensity difference over 48 hours (SPID48), analyzed using analysis of variance. RESULTS: Out of 60 patients randomized (mainly women [96.7%]; median age 44 years), 41 (68.3%) completed the treatment. Mean SPID48 values were significantly higher for tapentadol IR (p ≤ 0.006: 50 mg, p ≤ 0.004: 75 mg) compared with placebo. Between-group differences in LS means of SPID48 (vs. placebo) were tapentadol IR 50 mg: 105.6 (95% CI: 32.0; 179.2); tapentadol IR 75 mg: 126.6 (95% CI: 49.5; 203.7). Secondary endpoints including SPID at 12, 24, and 72 hours, time to first use of rescue medication, cumulative distribution of responder rates, total pain relief and sum of total pain relief and sum of pain intensity difference at 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours, and patient global impression of change showed numerically better results supporting that tapentadol IR (50 and 75 mg) was more efficacious than placebo in relieving acute pain. The most frequent treatment emergent adverse events reported in ≥ 10% patients in either group were dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. A limitation of this study may possibly include more controlled patient monitoring through 4-6 hour dosing intervals, which reflects optimal conditions and thus may not approximate real-world clinical practice. However, all treatment groups would be equally affected by such bias of frequent monitoring, if any, since it was a randomized and double-blind study. CONCLUSIONS: Tapentadol IR treatment significantly relieved acute postoperative pain and was well tolerated in a Taiwanese population. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01813890.

Tapentadol prolonged release for managing moderate to severe, chronic malignant tumor-related pain.

BACKGROUND: Tapentadol prolonged release (PR) is effective and well tolerated for chronic osteoarthritis, low back, and diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol PR compared with placebo and morphine controlled release (CR) for managing moderate to severe chronic malignant tumor-related pain. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized-withdrawal, parallel group, active- and placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 study (NCT00472303). SETTING: Primary, secondary, and tertiary care settings in 16 countries. METHODS: Eligible patients (pain intensity ≥ 5 [11-point numerical rating scale] on prior analgesics) were randomized (2:1) and titrated to their optimal dose of tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) or morphine sulfate CR (40-100 mg bid) over 2 weeks. Morphine sulfate immediate release 10 mg was permitted as needed for rescue medication (no maximum dose). Patients who completed titration and, during the last 3 days of titration, had mean pain intensity < 5 (based on twice-daily ratings) and mean rescue medication use = 20 mg/day continued into a 4-week maintenance period; patients who received morphine CR during titration continued taking morphine CR, and those who received tapentadol PR were re-randomized (1:1) to tapentadol PR or placebo bid. Response during maintenance (primary efficacy endpoint) was defined as having: (1) completed the maintenance period, (2) a mean pain intensity < 5 during maintenance, and (3) used an average of = 20 mg/day of rescue medication during maintenance. Response at the end of titration was defined similarly, with pain intensity and rescue medication averages based on the last 3 days of titration. RESULTS: Of 622 patients screened, 496 were randomized, treated during titration, and evaluable for safety; 327 were re-randomized, treated during maintenance, and evaluable for safety; and 325 were evaluable for efficacy. The adjusted responder rate estimate during maintenance (logistic regression adjusting for treatment group, pooled center, and pain intensity at start of maintenance) was significantly higher with tapentadol PR (64.3%) than with placebo (47.1%; odds ratio (OR), 2.02 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12 - 3.65]; P = 0.02). Based on responder rates at the end of titration, tapentadol PR (76.0% [174/229]) was non-inferior to morphine CR (83.0% [83/100]). The lower limit of the 95% CI for the between-groups difference (-15.5%) was within the pre-specified 20% non-inferiority margin. During titration, incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were 50.0% (169/338) with tapentadol PR and 63.9% (101/158) with morphine CR; incidences of nausea, vomiting, and dry mouth were lower with tapentadol PR than with morphine CR. During maintenance, incidences of TEAEs were 56.3% (63/112), 62.3% (66/106), and 62.4% (68/109) with placebo, tapentadol PR, and morphine CR, respectively. LIMITATIONS: Statistical comparisons between tapentadol PR and morphine CR were limited to descriptive statistics during the maintenance period because of the pre-selection of responders to tapentadol PR or morphine CR during titration. CONCLUSIONS: Results obtained during maintenance indicate that tapentadol PR (100-250 mg bid) is effective compared with placebo for managing moderate to severe chronic malignant tumor-related pain. Based on results obtained during titration, tapentadol PR provides comparable efficacy to that of morphine sulfate CR (40-100 mg bid), but is associated with better gastrointestinal tolerability.

A randomized withdrawal, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release in patients with chronic painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of tapentadol extended release (ER) for the management of chronic pain associated with diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Adults with moderate to severe DPN pain were titrated to tapentadol ER 100-250 mg bid during a 3-week open-label period; patients with ≥1-point reduction in pain intensity (11-point numerical rating scale) at end of titration were randomized to receive placebo or tapentadol ER (optimal dose from titration) for 12 weeks (double-blind, fixed-dose maintenance phase). The primary end point was mean change in average pain intensity from the start to week 12 (last observation carried forward [LOCF]) of the double-blind maintenance phase. RESULTS: A total of 358 patients completed the titration period; 318 patients (placebo, n = 152; tapentadol ER, n = 166) were randomized and received one or more doses of double-blind study medication. Mean (SD) pain intensity (observed case) was 7.33 (1.30) at the start and 4.16 (2.12) at week 3 of the open-label titration period (mean [SD] change, -3.22 [1.97]). The mean (SD) change in pain intensity (LOCF) from start of double-blind treatment to week 12 was as follows: placebo, 1.30 (2.43); tapentadol ER, 0.28 (2.04; least squares mean difference, -0.95 [95% CI -1.42 to -0.49]; P < 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse events (≥10%) in the tapentadol ER group during the double-blind maintenance phase were nausea (21.1%) and vomiting (12.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Tapentadol ER (100-250 mg bid) was effective and well tolerated for the management of moderate to severe chronic pain associated with DPN.

An open-label extension study of the safety and efficacy of risperidone in children and adolescents with autistic disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of risperidone in treating irritability and related behaviors in children and adolescents with autistic disorders. METHODS: In this 6 month (26 week) open-label extension (OLE) study, patients (5-17 years of age, who completed the previous fixed-dose, 6 week, double-blind [DB] phase) were flexibly dosed with risperidone based on body weight. The maximum allowed dose was 1.25 mg/day for those weighing 20 to <45 kg, and 1.75 mg/day for those weighing ≥ 45 kg. The study primarily assessed risperidone's safety; efficacy was assessed as a secondary end-point. RESULTS: Fifty-six (71%) out of 79 enrolled patients completed the OLE; the most common discontinuations were for insufficient response (7 [9%]) or adverse events (AE) (5 [6%]). The most common (≥ 5% frequency in the total group) AEs were increased appetite (11% [n=9]); increased weight and vomiting (9% [n=7] each); sedation, pyrexia, and upper respiratory tract infection (8% [n=6] each); nasopharyngitis (6% [n=5]); and somnolence and fatigue (5% [n=4] each). Extrapyramidal AEs were reported in 6 (8%) patients. Increase in mean weight (11-15%) and body mass index (5-10%) occurred; one patient discontinued because of weight increase. One potentially prolactin-related AE (irregular menstruation) was reported. The risperidone high-dose group had the greatest mean improvement in sleep visual analog scale (24.6). All groups showed additional improvement in efficacy scale scores during the OLE. CONCLUSIONS: During this OLE, safety findings with risperidone treatment (maximum weight-based dose of 1.25 mg/day or 1.75 mg/day) were consistent with those observed in the DB phase, and with the current safety information for risperidone in autistic, psychiatric, and behavioral disorders. Patients experienced some additional improvement in irritability and related behaviors. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: This phase-4 study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00576732).

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.

Risperidone dosing in children and adolescents with autistic disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Efficacy and safety of 2 risperidone doses were evaluated in children and adolescents with autism. Patients (N = 96; 5-17 years), received risperidone (low-dose: 0.125 mg/day [20 to <45 kg], 0.175 mg/day [>45 kg] or high-dose: 1.25 mg/day [20 to <45 kg], 1.75 mg/day [>45 kg]) or placebo. Mean baseline (range 27-29) to endpoint change in Aberrant Behavior Checklist-Irritability (primary endpoint) was significantly greater in the high-dose-(-12.4 [6.5]; p < 0.001), but not low-dose (-7.4 [8.1]; p = 0.164) group, versus placebo (-3.5 [10.7]). Clinical Global Impressions-Severity and Children's Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale scores improved significantly only in the high-dose group, consistent with ABC-I results. Somnolence, sedation and increased appetite occurred more frequently in high-versus low-dose groups. Overall, increased appetite occurred most frequently.

An open-label, multicenter evaluation of the long-term safety and efficacy of risperidone in adolescents with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Data on the long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of risperidone in adolescents with schizophrenia are limited. The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of maintenance risperidone treatment in adolescents with schizophrenia. METHODS: This open-label study of adolescents aged 13 to 17 years with schizophrenia was a single extension study of two short-term double-blind risperidone studies and also enrolled subjects directly in open-label risperidone treatment. The risperidone dose was flexible and ranged from 2 to 6 mg/day. Most subjects enrolled for 6 months; a subset enrolled for 12 months. Assessment tools included the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total and factor scores, Clinical Global Impressions, Children's Global Assessment Scale, adverse event (AE) monitoring, vital signs, laboratory testing, and extrapyramidal symptom rating scales. RESULTS: A total of 390 subjects were enrolled; 48 subjects had received placebo in a previous double-blind study; 292 subjects had received risperidone as part of their participation in one of two previous controlled studies; and 50 subjects were enrolled directly for this study. A total of 279 subjects enrolled for 6 months of treatment, and 111 subjects enrolled for 12 months of treatment. Overall, 264 (67.7%) subjects completed this study: 209 of the 279 subjects (75%) in the 6-month group and 55 of the 111 subjects (50%) in the 12-month group. The median mode dose was 3.8 mg/day. At 6 months, all three groups experienced improvement from open-label baseline in symptoms of schizophrenia as well as general assessments of global functioning. Improvements were generally maintained for the duration of treatment. The most common AEs (≥10% of subjects) were somnolence, headache, weight increase, hypertonia, insomnia, tremor, and psychosis. Potentially prolactin-related AEs (PPAEs) were reported by 36 (9%) subjects. The AE profile in this study was qualitatively similar to those of other studies in adult subjects with schizophrenia and in other psychiatric studies of risperidone in pediatric populations. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone maintenance treatment in adolescents over 6 to 12 months was well tolerated, consistent with related studies in this clinical population, and associated with continued efficacy. CLINICAL TRIALS: ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00246285 http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00246285?term=NCT00246285&rank=1.

Are the long-acting intramuscular formulations of risperidone or paliperidone palmitate associated with post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome? An assessment of safety databases.

Long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations of antipsychotics are valuable treatment alternatives for patients with psychotic disorders, and understanding their safe use is critical. Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome (PDSS) has been reported following treatment with one atypical antipsychotic LAI. Clinical databases of risperidone LAI and paliperidone palmitate were explored to identify if cases of PDSS had been observed. No cases of PDSS were identified in 15 completed trials of 3,164 subjects (approximately 115,000 injections) or the postmarketing safety database of risperidone LAI. Only one case of PDSS was identified among 10 completed trials (3,817 subjects, 33,906 injections) of paliperidone palmitate-that case having been reported in a patient randomized to treatment with placebo. Examination of these prospective databases finds no evidence that risperidone LAI and paliperidone palmitate are associated with PDSS and suggest that findings seen with another antipsychotic LAI are not generalizable.

Risperidone long-acting injectable monotherapy in the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Treatment adherence is a significant problem in patients with bipolar disorder. This study was designed to determine the efficacy of risperidone long-acting injectable (LAI) in the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder. METHODS: Eligible patients with current or recent manic or mixed episodes (n = 559, aged 18-65 years) were treated with open-label oral risperidone for 3 weeks (period II) and open-label risperidone LAI for 26 weeks (n = 501; period III). Patients who maintained response (n = 303) were randomly allocated 1:1 to placebo injections (n = 149) or to continue risperidone LAI (n = 154) for up to 24 months (period IV). RESULTS: Most (77%) patients on risperidone LAI received a dose of 25 mg every 2 weeks during period IV. Time to recurrence for any mood episode (primary outcome variable) was significantly longer in the risperidone LAI group versus placebo (p < .001); the difference was significant for time to recurrence of elevated-mood episode (p < .001) but not time to recurrence of depressive episode (p = .805). Weight gains > or = 7% (compared with the period's baseline) occurred in 15% of patients in period III; in 12% of patients on risperidone LAI and 3% of patients on placebo in period IV. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone LAI monotherapy significantly delayed the time to recurrence of mood episodes, versus placebo, in this controlled, randomized study in patients with bipolar I disorder. Risperidone LAI was tolerable and no new safety concerns emerged compared with previous studies of risperidone LAI.

Treating disruptive behavior disorders with risperidone: a 1-year, open-label safety study in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the long-term safety of risperidone as maintenance therapy in children and adolescents with disruptive behavior disorders (DBDs) and normal intelligence. METHOD: An open-label, 1-year extension study was conducted from January, 2002, to July, 2004, in 232 subjects with DBDs (5-17 years) previously randomized to risperidone (RIS) (n = 115, RIS/RIS) or placebo (PLA) (n = 117, PLA/RIS) in a double-blind, 6-month withdrawal study. Adverse events (AEs) and clinical laboratory test results were recorded. Efficacy was assessed using Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form. Safety and efficacy were evaluated in the intent-to-treat population. RESULTS: A total of 169/232 (73%) subjects completed the study. Subjects were predominantly male, with a diagnosis of oppositional defiant disorder. Risperidone was generally well tolerated. Weight gain and extrapyramidal symptoms were each reported as AEs by 10 subjects (4.3%). Mean weight z-scores decreased for RIS/RIS subjects (-0.04 +/- 0.28) and increased for PLA/RIS subjects (0.11 +/- 0.43). No subject developed tardive dyskinesia. Prolactin tended to increase with risperidone, although this effect diminished with prolonged use and was infrequently associated with AEs. There were no clinically relevant changes in glucose or lipid metabolism. Clinical improvement in DBD symptoms was observed with flexible risperidone doses, regardless of previous treatment and whether subjects had experienced symptom recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone reinitiated for DBD in children with normal intelligence quotients (IQ) was safe and well tolerated over an additional year of treatment. Patients demonstrated clinical benefits, including those who previously experienced symptom recurrence.

Long-acting injectable risperidone v. olanzapine tablets for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Randomised, controlled, open-label study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of long-acting injectable risperidone have not been compared with those of an oral atypical antipsychotic. AIMS: To compare long-acting risperidone and oral olanzapine in 377 patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: Patients were randomised to receive long-acting risperidone (25 mg or 50 mg every 14 days) or olanzapine (5-20 mg/day). RESULTS: In the 13-week phase, long-acting risperidone was at least as effective as (not inferior to) oral olanzapine. In the 12-month phase, significant improvements in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total and factor scores from baseline to month 12 and end-point were seen in both groups of patients. Few patients discontinued treatment because of an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Both treatments were efficacious and well tolerated.

An open-label extension trial of risperidone monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar I disorder.

The primary objective of this 9-week open-label extension trial was to assess the effects of risperidone monotherapy in patients with acute bipolar I disorder who completed treatment in two preceding 3-week double-blind trials. Patients with DSM-IV bipolar I disorder, experiencing an acute manic episode, received a flexible dose of risperidone (1-6 mg/day) or placebo in two independent double-blind, randomized, 3-week monotherapy trials. Completers who required ongoing treatment were eligible to enter this open-label 9-week extension trial during which all patients received risperidone. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score. Secondary efficacy measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Scale, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and Global Assessment Scale. Safety assessments included adverse event reports, laboratory tests, and the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale (ESRS). Of the 283 patients who entered the extension study, 160 had previously received risperidone (RIS/RIS) in the acute treatment trial and 123 had received placebo (PLA/RIS). This study was completed by 71% of these patients. The mean+/-SE modal dose of risperidone was 4.6+/-1.5 mg/day. Patients in both the RIS/RIS and PLA/RIS groups improved significantly at the endpoint of the 9-week open-label study compared to their open-label baseline scores (-5.2+/-0.69, P<0.001 and -9.12+/-1.44, P<0.001, respectively) on the YMRS. Furthermore, changes from double-blind baseline to open-label endpoint were -29.4+/-1.0 in the RIS/RIS group and -23.9+/-1.4 in the PLA/RIS group. Significant improvements from both double-blind and open-label baseline were seen at week 1 of the open-label trial (P<0.001) and at each subsequent timepoint. A similar pattern was observed on the secondary measures of efficacy. Most frequent adverse events were extrapyramidal disorder (18%) and somnolence (12%). Most adverse events were mild or moderate in severity. The mean score for the Parkinsonism subscale of the ESRS was 1.1 at open-label baseline, and decreased by 0.1 at endpoint. Mean increase in body weight from open-label baseline was 0.6 kg in patients treated with placebo in the preceding double-blind trial and 1.2 kg in patients previously treated with risperidone. Risperidone treatment was well tolerated and resulted in further improvement during the 9-week extension, beyond the 3 weeks of acute treatment. Patients switched from placebo to risperidone improved markedly. Risperidone treatment did not induce depression.

Acute and continuation risperidone monotherapy in bipolar mania: a 3-week placebo-controlled trial followed by a 9-week double-blind trial of risperidone and haloperidol.

In a randomized, double-blind trial, patients with acute bipolar mania received 1-6 mg/day of risperidone, 2-12 mg/day of haloperidol, or placebo for 3 weeks, followed by double-blind risperidone or haloperidol for 9 weeks. Of 438 patients, 154 were randomized to risperidone, 144 to haloperidol, and 140 to placebo. The mean+/-S.D. modal doses were 4.2+/-1.7 mg/day of risperidone and 8.0+/-3.6 mg/day of haloperidol during the initial 3-week phase and 4.1+/-1.8 and 7.4+/-3.7 mg/day during the 12-week period. At week 3, mean Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score reductions from baseline were significantly greater in patients receiving risperidone than placebo (p<0.001). Differences between risperidone and haloperidol on this efficacy measure were not significant. Further reductions in YMRS scores were seen in patients receiving risperidone or haloperidol during the subsequent 9 weeks. No unexpected adverse events were reported. Extrapyramidal disorder and hyperkinesias, the most commonly reported adverse events with antipsychotic use, occurred less frequently with risperidone than haloperidol. We conclude that risperidone monotherapy was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for bipolar mania and that efficacy was maintained over the long term.

Rapid antimanic effect of risperidone monotherapy: a 3-week multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of risperidone monotherapy in the treatment of acute bipolar mania. METHOD: Patients with DSM-IV bipolar I disorder experiencing an acute manic episode (baseline Young Mania Rating Scale score >/==" BORDER="0">20) were randomly assigned to 3 weeks of treatment with risperidone (flexible dose: 1-6 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the mean baseline-to-endpoint change in total score on the Young Mania Rating Scale. Secondary efficacy measures included the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) severity rating and scores on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and Global Assessment Scale (GAS). Safety assessments consisted of monitoring adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiogram and laboratory results, and scores on the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale. RESULTS: Subjects (N=259) received treatment with either risperidone (N=134) or placebo (N=125). The mean modal dose of risperidone was 4.1 mg/day. Improvement in mean Young Mania Rating Scale total score (adjusted for covariates) was significantly greater in the risperidone than in the placebo group at endpoint (mean change=-10.6 [SD=9.5] versus -4.8 [SD=9.5], respectively), with significant between-group differences seen as early as 3 days after start of treatment (change with risperidone: mean=-6.8 [SD=5.8]; change with placebo: mean=-4.0 [SD=5.8]) and continuing throughout all time points. Improvements in CGI severity ratings and scores on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and GAS were also significantly greater among patients receiving risperidone than those given placebo. The most common adverse event reported among risperidone patients was somnolence. While Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale scores were significantly greater in patients receiving risperidone, mean total and subscale scores were low. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone monotherapy was significantly more efficacious than placebo in the treatment of acute mania and demonstrated a rapid onset of action. Risperidone was well tolerated by patients in this study.

Treatment of schizophrenia with long-acting injectable risperidone: a 12-month open-label trial of the first long-acting second-generation antipsychotic.

BACKGROUND: The long-term safety and efficacy of long-acting injectable risperidone, the first long-acting second-generation antipsychotic, were evaluated in stable patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: After a 2-week run-in period during which patients with DSM-IV schizophrenia received flexible doses of 1 to 6 mg of oral risperidone, patients received injections of 25 mg, 50 mg, or 75 mg of long-acting risperidone every 2 weeks for 12 months. Severity of extrapyramidal symptoms was assessed with the Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale (ESRS), and efficacy was assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). This study was conducted from March 29, 1999 to July 19, 2000. RESULTS: The subjects were 615 patients with schizophrenia who received at least 1 injection of long-acting risperidone. The 12-month trial was completed by 65% of patients. Treatment was discontinued because of adverse events in 5% of patients. Extrapyramidal symptoms as adverse events were reported by 25% of the patients. Severity of extrapyramidal symptoms (according to ESRS scores) was low at baseline and decreased in each of the groups during the 12 months. The other most common adverse events were anxiety in 24%, insomnia in 21%, psychosis in 17%, and depression in 14% of the patients. Little pain was associated with the injections. Severity of symptoms of schizophrenia was improved in each group, with significant reductions in PANSS total scores (p <.01) and positive (p <.01) and negative (p <.001) factor scores. CONCLUSION: In terms of both safety and efficacy, symptomatically stable patients with schizophrenia benefit from being switched to long-acting injectable risperidone.

Long-acting injectable risperidone: efficacy and safety of the first long-acting atypical antipsychotic.

OBJECTIVE: The authors assessed the efficacy and safety of the first long-acting atypical antipsychotic (long-acting injectable risperidone) in patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: In a 12-week, multicenter, double-blind, randomized study, patients received intramuscular injections every 2 weeks of placebo or long-acting risperidone (25 mg, 50 mg, or 75 mg). The primary measure of efficacy was the change in total score on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale. RESULTS: Of the 554 patients who were enrolled, 400 entered the double-blind study, and 370 received at least one postbaseline assessment. Mean changes in score of -6.2, -8.5, and -7.4 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale were seen at endpoint for the 25-, 50-, and 75-mg risperidone groups, respectively; all three change scores were significantly different from that seen with placebo (+2.6). Improvements in positive and negative symptoms were also significantly greater in patients receiving risperidone. Long-acting risperidone was well tolerated. Adverse events related to extrapyramidal symptoms were spontaneously reported by 13% of patients receiving placebo and 10% of patients in the 25-mg risperidone group, with higher rates in the 50-mg and 75-mg groups. Severity of extrapyramidal symptoms was mild at baseline and throughout the trial in each treatment group. Mean weight changes were small in the 25-, 50-, and 75-mg risperidone groups (0.5 kg, 1.2 kg, and 1.9 kg, respectively). Injection site pain was rated as low by the patients, consistent with the investigators' pain ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Long-acting injectable risperidone was efficacious and well tolerated and provides both clinicians and patients with a new mode of treatment that can improve the outcome of long-term therapy.