Mortality and adverse events associated with statin use in primary care patients with depression: a real-world, population-based cohort study.

BACKGROUND: New National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance endorses the prescription of statins in larger population groups for the prevention of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular morbidity and mortality, especially in people with severe mental illness. However, the evidence base for their safety and risk/benefit balance in depression is not established. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to assess the real-world mortality and adverse events of statins in depressive disorders. METHODS: Population-based, nationwide (England), between-subject, cohort study. We used electronic health records (QResearch database) of people aged 18-100 years with first-episode depression, registered with English primary care practices over January 1998-August 2020 for 12(+) months, divided into statin users versus non-users.Primary safety outcomes included all-cause mortality and any adverse event measured at 2, 6 and 12 months. Multivariable logistic regression was employed to control for several potential confounders and calculate adjusted ORs (aORs) with 99% CIs. FINDINGS: From over 1 050 105 patients with depression (42.64% males, mean age 43.23±18.32 years), 21 384 (2.04%) died, while 707 111 (67.34%) experienced at least one adverse event during the 12-month follow-up. Statin use was associated with lower mortality over 12 months (range aOR2-12months 0.66-0.67, range 99% CI 0.60 to 0.73) and with lower adverse events over 6 months (range aOR2-6months 0.90-0.96, range 99% CI 0.91 to 0.99), but not at 1 year (aOR12months 0.99, 99% CI 0.96 to 1.03). No association with any other individual outcome measure (ie, any other neuropsychiatric symptoms) was identified. CONCLUSIONS: We found no evidence that statin use among people with depression increases mortality or other adverse events. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Our findings support the safety of updated NICE guidelines for prescribing statins in people with depressive disorders.

New living evidence resource of human and non-human studies for early intervention and research prioritisation in anxiety, depression and psychosis.

In anxiety, depression and psychosis, there has been frustratingly slow progress in developing novel therapies that make a substantial difference in practice, as well as in predicting which treatments will work for whom and in what contexts. To intervene early in the process and deliver optimal care to patients, we need to understand the underlying mechanisms of mental health conditions, develop safe and effective interventions that target these mechanisms, and improve our capabilities in timely diagnosis and reliable prediction of symptom trajectories. Better synthesis of existing evidence is one way to reduce waste and improve efficiency in research towards these ends. Living systematic reviews produce rigorous, up-to-date and informative evidence summaries that are particularly important where research is emerging rapidly, current evidence is uncertain and new findings might change policy or practice. Global Alliance for Living Evidence on aNxiety, depressiOn and pSychosis (GALENOS) aims to tackle the challenges of mental health science research by cataloguing and evaluating the full spectrum of relevant scientific research including both human and preclinical studies. GALENOS will also allow the mental health community-including patients, carers, clinicians, researchers and funders-to better identify the research questions that most urgently need to be answered. By creating open-access datasets and outputs in a state-of-the-art online resource, GALENOS will help identify promising signals early in the research process. This will accelerate translation from discovery science into effective new interventions for anxiety, depression and psychosis, ready to be translated in clinical practice across the world.

Predicting outcomes at the individual patient level: what is the best method?

OBJECTIVE: When developing prediction models, researchers commonly employ a single model which uses all the available data (end-to-end approach). Alternatively, a similarity-based approach has been previously proposed, in which patients with similar clinical characteristics are first grouped into clusters, then prediction models are developed within each cluster. The potential advantage of the similarity-based approach is that it may better address heterogeneity in patient characteristics. However, it remains unclear whether it improves the overall predictive performance. We illustrate the similarity-based approach using data from people with depression and empirically compare its performance with the end-to-end approach. METHODS: We used primary care data collected in general practices in the UK. Using 31 predefined baseline variables, we aimed to predict the severity of depressive symptoms, measured by Patient Health Questionnaire-9, 60 days after initiation of antidepressant treatment. Following the similarity-based approach, we used k-means to cluster patients based on their baseline characteristics. We derived the optimal number of clusters using the Silhouette coefficient. We used ridge regression to build prediction models in both approaches. To compare the models' performance, we calculated the mean absolute error (MAE) and the coefficient of determination (R2) using bootstrapping. RESULTS: We analysed data from 16 384 patients. The end-to-end approach resulted in an MAE of 4.64 and R2 of 0.20. The best-performing similarity-based model was for four clusters, with MAE of 4.65 and R2 of 0.19. CONCLUSIONS: The end-to-end and the similarity-based model yielded comparable performance. Due to its simplicity, the end-to-end approach can be favoured when using demographic and clinical data to build prediction models on pharmacological treatments for depression.

Proportion attributable to contextual effects in general medicine: a meta-epidemiological study based on Cochrane reviews.

OBJECTIVES: Our objectives were to examine the magnitude of the proportion attributable to contextual effects (PCE), which shows what proportion of the treatment arm response can be achieved by the placebo arm across various interventions, and to examine PCE variability by outcome type and condition. DESIGN: We conducted a meta-epidemiological study. SETTING: We searched the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews with the keyword 'placebo' in titles, abstracts and keywords on 1 January 2020. PARTICIPANTS: We included reviews that showed statistically significant beneficial effects of the intervention over placebo for the first primary outcome. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We performed a random-effects meta-analysis to calculate PCEs based on the pooled result of each included review, grouped by outcome type and condition. The PCE quantifies how much of the observed treatment response can be achieved by the contextual effects. PUBLIC AND PATIENT INVOLVEMENT STATEMENT: No patient or member of the public was involved in conducting this research. RESULTS: We included 328 out of 3175 Cochrane systematic reviews. The results of meta-analyses showed that PCEs varied greatly depending on outcome type (I2=98%) or condition (I2=98%), but mostly lie between 0.40 and 0.95. Overall, the PCEs were 0.65 (95% CI 0.59 to 0.72) on average. Subjective outcomes were 0.50 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.59), which was significantly smaller than those of semiobjective (PCE 0.78; 95% CI 0.72 to 0.85) or objective outcomes (PCE 0.94; 95% CI 0.91 to 0.97). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that much of the observed benefit is not just due to the specific effect of the interventions. The specific effects of interventions may be larger for subjective outcomes than for objective or semiobjective outcomes. However, PCEs were exceptionally variable. When we evaluate the magnitude of PCEs, we should consider each PCE individually, for each condition, intervention and outcome in its context, to assess the importance of an intervention for each specific clinical setting.

The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Associated Control Measures on the Mental Health of the General Population : A Systematic Review and Dose-Response Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: To what extent the COVID-19 pandemic and its containment measures influenced mental health in the general population is still unclear. PURPOSE: To assess the trajectory of mental health symptoms during the first year of the pandemic and examine dose-response relations with characteristics of the pandemic and its containment. DATA SOURCES: Relevant articles were identified from the living evidence database of the COVID-19 Open Access Project, which indexes COVID-19-related publications from MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase via Ovid, and PsycInfo. Preprint publications were not considered. STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal studies that reported data on the general population's mental health using validated scales and that were published before 31 March 2021 were eligible. DATA EXTRACTION: An international crowd of 109 trained reviewers screened references and extracted study characteristics, participant characteristics, and symptom scores at each timepoint. Data were also included for the following country-specific variables: days since the first case of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the stringency of governmental containment measures, and the cumulative numbers of cases and deaths. DATA SYNTHESIS: In a total of 43 studies (331 628 participants), changes in symptoms of psychological distress, sleep disturbances, and mental well-being varied substantially across studies. On average, depression and anxiety symptoms worsened in the first 2 months of the pandemic (standardized mean difference at 60 days, -0.39 [95% credible interval, -0.76 to -0.03]); thereafter, the trajectories were heterogeneous. There was a linear association of worsening depression and anxiety with increasing numbers of reported cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection and increasing stringency in governmental measures. Gender, age, country, deprivation, inequalities, risk of bias, and study design did not modify these associations. LIMITATIONS: The certainty of the evidence was low because of the high risk of bias in included studies and the large amount of heterogeneity. Stringency measures and surges in cases were strongly correlated and changed over time. The observed associations should not be interpreted as causal relationships. CONCLUSION: Although an initial increase in average symptoms of depression and anxiety and an association between higher numbers of reported cases and more stringent measures were found, changes in mental health symptoms varied substantially across studies after the first 2 months of the pandemic. This suggests that different populations responded differently to the psychological stress generated by the pandemic and its containment measures. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation. (PROSPERO: CRD42020180049).

Development and validation of a meta-learner for combining statistical and machine learning prediction models in individuals with depression.

BACKGROUND: The debate of whether machine learning models offer advantages over standard statistical methods when making predictions is ongoing. We discuss the use of a meta-learner model combining both approaches as an alternative. METHODS: To illustrate the development of a meta-learner, we used a dataset of 187,757 people with depression. Using 31 variables, we aimed to predict two outcomes measured 60 days after initiation of antidepressant treatment: severity of depressive symptoms (continuous) and all-cause dropouts (binary). We fitted a ridge regression and a multi-layer perceptron (MLP) deep neural network as two separate prediction models ("base-learners"). We then developed two "meta-learners", combining predictions from the two base-learners. To compare the performance across the different methods, we calculated mean absolute error (MAE, for continuous outcome) and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC, for binary outcome) using bootstrapping. RESULTS: Compared to the best performing base-learner (MLP base-learner, MAE at 4.63, AUC at 0.59), the best performing meta-learner showed a 2.49% decrease in MAE at 4.52 for the continuous outcome and a 6.47% increase in AUC at 0.60 for the binary outcome. CONCLUSIONS: A meta-learner approach may effectively combine multiple prediction models. Choosing between statistical and machine learning models may not be necessary in practice.

Vitruvian plot: a visualisation tool for multiple outcomes in network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: A network meta-analysis (NMA) usually assesses multiple outcomes across several treatment comparisons. The Vitruvian plot aims to facilitate communication of multiple outcomes from NMAs to patients and clinicians. METHODS: We developed this tool following the recommendations on the communication of benefit-risk information from the available literature. We collected and implemented feedback from researchers, statisticians, methodologists, clinicians and people with lived experience of physical and mental health issues. RESULTS: We present the Vitruvian plot, which graphically presents absolute estimates and relative performance of competing interventions against a common comparator for several outcomes of interest. We use two alternative colour schemes to highlight either the strength of statistical evidence or the confidence in the evidence. Confidence in the evidence is evaluated across six domains (within-study bias, reporting bias, indirectness, imprecision, heterogeneity and incoherence) using the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis (CINeMA) system. CONCLUSIONS: The Vitruvian plot allows reporting of multiple outcomes from NMAs, with colourings appropriate to inform credibility of the presented evidence.

Efficacy of tiapride in the treatment of psychiatric disorders: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Tiapride is an atypical antipsychotic used to treat alcohol withdrawal, aggressiveness and agitation, headache, dyskinesias, tic and Tourette's disorder. More recently, it has been proposed for the treatment of delirium and agitation in hospitalised patients with COVID-19. Although its safety profile makes it suitable for use in vulnerable populations, the use of tiapride for psychiatric disorders is limited. This work aims to systematically review the available evidence on the efficacy and tolerability of tiapride in individuals with a psychiatric disorder. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, GreyLit, OpenGrey, and ProQuest up to March 2020 for randomised controlled trials focussing on the use of tiapride in the treatment of individuals with a psychiatric disorder (e.g., mood disorder, schizophrenia spectrum, substance use disorder). The Risk of Bias 2 was performed for the quality assessment of the included studies. RESULTS: We identified 579 records. Of them, six studies (published between 1982 and 2010) were included in the review. Four studies referred to alcohol withdrawal, and two to the management of agitation in elderly patients with dementia. None of the studies reported significant differences between tiapride and other active comparators in terms of efficacy and tolerability. The overall risk of bias was moderate to high. CONCLUSION: Tiapride may be considered as a relatively safe treatment option for selected patients with alcohol withdrawal or agitation in dementia. However, solid evidence of its efficacy in the scientific literature is lacking. High-quality trials remain necessary to fully sustain its use in clinical practice.

Efficacy of amisulpride for depressive symptoms in individuals with mental disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Depressive symptoms occur in several psychiatric disorders, often in the absence of a formal diagnosis of depression. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and the tolerability of amisulpride, both alone and as augmentation therapy, in the treatment of depressive symptoms in individuals with any major psychiatric disorder. METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, GreyLit, OpenGrey and ProQuest up to March 2020 for randomised controlled trials focussing on the treatment of an acute depressive episode in any major psychiatric disorder. A random-effect meta-analysis was performed to synthesize the findings on depressive symptoms (primary outcome), response rate and tolerability. RESULTS: We retrieved 11 studies including 2065 patients with a diagnosis of dysthymia (eight studies), major depression (one study) or schizophrenia (two studies). Amisulpride 50 mg/day was associated with a larger reduction of depressive symptoms compared to placebo (standardised mean difference [SMD] = -0.70, CI 95% -0.92, -0.49; I2  = 0.0%), and was found to be comparable to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; SMD = -0.08, CI 95% -0.23, 0.06, I2  = 0.0%), amineptine, imipramine and amitriptyline in the treatment of dysthymia (three studies, not pooled). In individuals with schizophrenia, amisulpride administered at higher doses (>400 mg/day) was comparable to olanzapine and risperidone (two studies, not pooled). In terms of tolerability, amisulpride was superior to placebo for dysthymia (odds ratio [OR] = 3.94, CI 95% 1.07, 14.48; I2  = 0.0) and comparable with SSRIs (OR = 0.94, CI 95% 0.55, 1.62; I2  = 0.0%). CONCLUSION: Treatment with amisulpride could be a valid choice for selected individuals with dysthymia or depressive symptoms in the context of schizophrenia. More studies on the efficacy and tolerability of amisulpride are needed to draw firm conclusions on its potential benefits in other psychiatric disorders.

Comparing Long-Acting Antipsychotic Discontinuation Rates Under Ordinary Clinical Circumstances: A Survival Analysis from an Observational, Pragmatic Study.

BACKGROUND: Recent guidelines suggested a wider use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) than previously, but naturalistic data on the consequences of LAI use in terms of discontinuation rates and associated factors are still sparse, making it hard for clinicians to be informed on plausible treatment courses. OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to assess, under real-world clinical circumstances, LAI discontinuation rates over a period of 12 months after a first prescription, reasons for discontinuation, and associated factors. METHODS: The STAR Network 'Depot Study' was a naturalistic, multicentre, observational prospective study that enrolled subjects initiating a LAI without restrictions on diagnosis, clinical severity or setting. Participants from 32 Italian centres were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Psychopathology, drug attitude and treatment adherence were measured using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Drug Attitude Inventory and the Kemp scale, respectively. RESULTS: The study followed 394 participants for 12 months. The overall discontinuation rate at 12 months was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.4-44.3), with paliperidone LAI being the least discontinued LAI (33.9%; 95% CI 25.3-43.5) and olanzapine LAI the most discontinued (62.5%; 95% CI 35.4-84.8). The most frequent reason for discontinuation was onset of adverse events (32.9%; 95% CI 25.6-40.9) followed by participant refusal of the medication (20.6%; 95% CI 14.6-27.9). Medication adherence at baseline was negatively associated with discontinuation risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.853; 95% CI 0.742-0.981; p = 0.026), whereas being prescribed olanzapine LAI was associated with increased discontinuation risk compared with being prescribed paliperidone LAI (HR 2.156; 95% CI 1.003-4.634; p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should be aware that LAI discontinuation is a frequent occurrence. LAI choice should be carefully discussed with the patient, taking into account individual characteristics and possible obstacles related to the practicalities of each formulation.

Efficacy of Triple Chronotherapy in unipolar and bipolar depression: A systematic review of the available evidence.

BACKGROUND: Given the strong relationship between circadian rhythm disruption and mood regulation, combined chronotherapeutic approaches have been proposed for mood disorders. However, a comprehensive review of the available evidence on the efficacy of such interventions for depression is lacking. AIM: To systematically review available literature on Triple Chronotherapy (Sleep Deprivation - Sleep Phase Advance - Bright Light Therapy) for depressive symptoms in Major Depression and Bipolar Depression. METHODS: We followed the PRISMA statement for systematic reviews to conduct a web-based search on PubMed, Scopus and Embase using a list of selected keywords relevant to depression and chronotherapy. RESULTS: After title and abstract screening of the 321 records retrieved, 25 potentially eligible studies were assessed at full-text screening. Nineteen studies were excluded for failure to match inclusion criteria. Six records of Triple Chronotherapy in addition to conventional treatment, published between 2009 and 2019, were included in the revision. All studies reported significant improvements on HAM-D scores at the end of treatment, with 50% to 84% response rates. Efficacy of treatment was confirmed on follow-up by three studies, with 58% to 61% response rates. Remission rates varied from 33,3% to 77%. Reported side effects were negligible across studies. LIMITATIONS: Available trials are very few and only one included a control group treated with a daily exercise program. CONCLUSIONS: The limited literature suggests that Triple chronotherapy might be a safe and effective addition to conventional antidepressant interventions, although well-designed, randomized controlled trials are needed.

[Triple Chronotherapy approach for reducing depressive symptoms and suicidal intent in hospitalized patients: Study protocol of a Randomized Controlled Trial]. / La Triple Chronotherapy come approccio per la riduzione della sintomatologia depressiva e dell'intenzionalità suicidaria in pazienti ospedalizzati: Protocollo di studio di un Trial Clinico randomizzato controllato.

BACKGROUND: Depressive disorders are a relevant burden for public health due to their prevalence and high levels of associated disability and mortality. Recent studies suggest that the combination of multiple chronotherapuetic interventions may reveal effective in the rapid improvement of depressive symptoms. OBJECTIVES: This paper describes the protocol of a study that aims to test the efficacy of a triple chronotherapy intervention (combined total sleep deprivation, light therapy and sleep phase advance) in the improvement of depressive symptoms in individuals diagnosed with unipolar or bipolar depression. METHODS: A randomized controlled trial will be conducted in patients hospitalized with a unipolar or bipolar depression at the Servizio Psichiatrico di Diagnosi e Cura inpatient unit of the San Paolo - ASST Santi Paolo e Carlo Hospital in Milan, Italy. Individuals will be randomly assigned to the intervention (triple chronotherapy add-on to standard pharmacological treatment) or to the "control" group (standard pharmacological treatment). RESULTS: Enrolment began in December 2018 and will end in October 2020, or at any earlier point in which the expected sample size will be reached. The study protocol has already been approved by the local ethics committee and is registered as EudraCT 2019-000892-18. Outcome analyses aim to verify whether triple chronotherapy produces a rapid and stable improvement in depressive symptoms in individuals hospitalized for an acute unipolar or bipolar depressive episode.

Clinical correlates of paliperidone palmitate and aripiprazole monohydrate prescription for subjects with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders: findings from the STAR Network Depot Study.

This study, based on the 'Servizi Territoriali Associati per la Ricerca' (STAR) Network Depot Study nationwide baseline data, explored whether individual symptoms severity and clusters might influence the prescription of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) vs. aripiprazole monohydrate. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) was used to assess psychopathology and relevant symptoms clusters. Drug Attitude Inventory, 10 items, was used to test attitude towards medications. Adherence to treatments was rated according to the Kemp seven-point scale. We assessed for eligibility 451 individuals and, among them, we included 195 subjects (n = 117 who started PPM1 and n = 78 aripiprazole monohydrate). Individuals were comparable in terms of age, gender, treatment years, recent hospitalizations, previous long-acting injectable antipsychotic treatments, additional oral treatments, attitude toward drugs, medication adherence, and alcohol/substance-related comorbidities. Subjects starting PP1M presented higher BPRS overall (P = 0.009), positive (P = 0.015), and negative (P = 0.010) symptom scores compared to subjects starting aripiprazole monohydrate. Results were confirmed by appropriate regression models and propensity score matching analysis. No differences were found comparing the other BPRS subscale scores: affect, resistance, and activation. Clinicians may be more prone to prescribe PPM1, rather than aripiprazole monohydrate, to subjects showing higher overall symptom severity, including positive and negative symptoms. No additional clinical factors influenced prescribing attitudes in our sample.

Evidence synthesis, practice guidelines and real-world prescriptions of new generation antidepressants in the treatment of depression: a protocol for cumulative network meta-analyses and meta-epidemiological study.

INTRODUCTION: Depressive disorders are the most common, burdensome and costly mental disorders. Their treatments have developed through the past decades and we now have more than a dozen new generation antidepressants, while a series of guidelines have been published to provide recommendations over the years. However, there still may exist important gaps in this evidence synthesis and implementation process. Systematic reviews may not have been conducted in the most unbiased, informative and timely manners; guidelines may not have reflected the most up-to-date evidence; clinicians may not have changed their clinical decision-makings in accordance with the relevant evidence. The aim of this study is to examine the gaps between the ideally synthesised evidence, guideline recommendations and real-world clinical practices in the prescription of new generation antidepressants for major depression through the past three decades. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct cumulative network meta-analyses (cNMAs) based on the comprehensive systematic review which has identified published and unpublished head-to-head randomised controlled trials comparing the following antidepressants in the acute phase treatment of major depression: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The primary outcomes will be the proportions of patients who responded (efficacy) and who withdrew from treatment for any reasons (acceptability). We will conduct a random effects cNMA to synthesise evidence and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all new generation antidepressants based on their surface under the cumulative ranking curves. We will identify series of international clinical practice guidelines for the treatment of major depression of adults and summarise their recommendations. We will estimate real-world prescription patterns of antidepressants in the nationally representative samples in USA in the Medical Expenditure Panel Survey. We will compare and evaluate the gaps between the rankings according to cNMAs conducted at 5-year intervals between 1990 and 2015, recommendations in guidelines published in the ensuing 5 years and actual practices thereafter. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This review does not require ethical approval. We will disseminate our findings through publications in peer-reviewed journals and presentations at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000031898.

Factors associated with first- versus second-generation long-acting antipsychotics prescribed under ordinary clinical practice in Italy.

BACKGROUND: For many years, long-acting intramuscular (LAI) antipsychotics have been prescribed predominantly to chronic and severe patients, as a last resort when other treatments failed. Recently, a broader and earlier use of LAIs, particularly second-generation LAIs, has been emphasized. To date, few studies attempted to frame how this change in prescribing took place in real-world practice. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the clinical features of patients prescribed with LAIs, and to explore possible prescribing differences between first- and second-generations LAIs under ordinary clinical practice in Italy. METHODS: The STAR Network "Depot" Study is an observational, longitudinal, multicenter study involving 35 centers in Italy. In the cross-sectional phase, patients prescribed with LAIs were consecutively recruited and assessed over a period of 12 months. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed. RESULTS: Of the 451 recruited patients, 61% were males. The level of social and working functioning was heterogeneous, as was the severity of disease. Seventy-two per cent of the patients had a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum. Seventy per cent were prescribed with second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) LAIs (mostly paliperidone, aripiprazole and risperidone). Compared to first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) LAIs, patients prescribed with SGA LAIs were more often younger; employed; with a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorder; with higher levels of affective symptoms; with fewer LAI prescriptions in the past. DISCUSSION: LAIs' prescribing practices appear to be more flexible as compared to the past, although this change is mostly restricted to SGA LAIs.

Asenapine in the Treatment of Acute Mania: A Real-World Observational Study With 6 Months Follow-Up.

Asenapine is a second-generation antipsychotic with a unique pharmacological profile that was recently approved for the treatment of moderate/severe manic episodes. Real-world data on rapidity of action in inpatient settings are lacking.The aims of the current real-world observational study were to evaluate: (i) short-term efficacy of asenapine after 7 days (T0-T1) in patients hospitalized for a manic episode in the course of bipolar I disorder or schizoaffective disorder (group A), (ii) differences in length of stay (LoS), and (iii) rehospitalization compared to a control population (group B) with a 6-month follow-up.Twenty patients were included in each group. The mean total Young Mania Rating Scale score decreased by 12.6 (SD ±10.3; t(17) = 5.2, P < 0.005), implying a mean 37.8% improvement. A statistically significant reduction was observed for all Young Mania Rating Scale items, except for "sexual interest." The mean total BPRS score decreased by 17.2 (SD ±14.9; t(17) = 4.9, P < 0.005). A statistically significant reduction was observed for several items, including "conceptual disorganization," "grandiosity," "unusual thought content," and "excitement". Length of stay was 17.9 (SD ±9.0) days for group A and 14.7 (SD ±12.7) days for group B; the result of the Kruskal-Wallis test showed no significant differences (χ = 2.199, P = 0.138). Despite a high discontinuation rate, only 17.7% of patients in group A were rehospitalized in the following 6 months compared to 41.2% of those in group B (relative risk = 0.43, 95% confidence interval, 0.13-1.39).Findings from this small, preliminary study at least partially support the results of previous trials, confirming effectiveness and tolerability in the context of comorbidity and polypsychopharmacology.