Innate Responses to the Former COVID-19 Vaccine Candidate CVnCoV and Their Relation to Reactogenicity and Adaptive Immunogenicity.

Vaccines are highly effective at preventing severe coronavirus disease (COVID-19). With mRNA vaccines, further research is needed to understand the association between immunogenicity and reactogenicity, which is defined as the physical manifestation of an inflammatory response to a vaccination. This study analyzed the immune response and reactogenicity in humans, post immunization, to the former SARS-CoV-2 mRNA investigational vaccine CVnCoV (CV-NCOV-001 and CV-NCOV-002 clinical trials). Immunogenicity was investigated using whole-blood RNA sequencing, serum cytokine levels, and SARS-CoV-2-specific antibodies. The T cell responses in peripheral blood were assessed using intracellular cytokine staining (ICS) and high-dimensional profiling in conjunction with SARS-CoV-2 antigen-specificity testing via mass cytometry. Reactogenicity was graded after participants' first and second doses of CVnCoV using vaccine-related solicited adverse events (AEs). Finally, a Spearman correlation was performed between reactogenicity, humoral immunity, and serum cytokine levels to assess the relationship between reactogenicity and immunogenicity post CVnCoV vaccination. Our findings showed that the gene sets related to innate and inflammatory immune responses were upregulated one day post CVnCoV vaccination, while the gene sets related to adaptive immunity were upregulated predominantly one week after the second dose. The serum levels of IFNα, IFNγ, IP-10, CXCL11, IL-10, and MCP-1 increased transiently, peaking one day post vaccination. CD4+ T cells were induced in all vaccinated participants and low frequencies of CD8+ T cells were detected by ex vivo ICS. Using mass cytometry, SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific CD8+ T cells were induced and were characterized as having an activated effector memory phenotype. Overall, the results demonstrated a positive correlation between vaccine-induced systemic cytokines, reactogenicity, and adaptive immunity, highlighting the importance of the balance between the induction of innate immunity to achieve vaccine efficacy and ensuring low reactogenicity.

Corrigendum to "Safety and immunogenicity of mRNA-LNP COVID-19 vaccine CVnCoV in Latin American adults: A phase 2 randomized study" [Vaccine: X 11 (2022) 100189].

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1016/j.jvacx.2022.100189.].

Gender Differences in the Psychopharmacological Treatment of Forensic In-Patients With Schizophrenia.

Background: In forensic psychiatry, psychopharmacological treatment plays a crucial role for patients with schizophrenia in improving their medical as well as legal prognosis. However, an increase in the number of females entering forensic treatment has yet to yield empirical research on the outcome of psychopharmacological treatment of female patients with schizophrenia in terms of efficacy and tolerability. Aims: The aim of the present study is to elucidate pharmacological treatment strategies of women with schizophrenia in forensic psychiatry in comparison with men. Methods: This study compares psychopharmacological treatment strategies, psychopathological features, as well as neurological and metabolic side effects of treatment between 29 female and 29 male in-patients with schizophrenia in three forensic facilities in Bavaria, Germany. Results: Results show significant differences between genders. Poorer psychopathological and neurological features were found in the female sample, while men registered worse metabolic parameters. In terms of psychopharmacological treatment strategies, female in-patients were more often prescribed second-generation depot antipsychotics. Surprisingly, the potency of the dosages did not differ between genders. The results suggest that female forensic patients with schizophrenia have more severe and refractory diseases than their male counterparts. Conclusion: Recommendations for gender-specific treatment strategies are derived.

Safety and immunogenicity of mRNA-LNP COVID-19 vaccine CVnCoV in Latin American adults: A phase 2 randomized study.

Background: The COVID-19 vaccine candidate CVnCoV comprises sequence-optimized mRNA encoding SARS-CoV-2 S-protein encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles. In this phase 2a study, we assessed reactogenicity and immunogenicity of two or three doses in younger and older adults. Methods: Younger (18-60 years) and older (>60 years) adults were enrolled in two sites in Panama and Peru to receive either 6 or 12 µg doses of CVnCoV or licensed control vaccines 28 days apart; subsets received a 12 µg booster dose on Day 57 or Day 180. Solicited adverse events (AE) were reported for 7 days and unsolicited AEs for 4 weeks after each vaccination, and serious AEs (SAE) throughout the study. Humoral immunogenicity was measured as neutralizing and receptor binding domain (RBD) IgG antibodies and cellular immunogenicity was assessed as CD4+/CD8 + T cell responses. Results: A total of 668 participants were vaccinated (332 aged 18-60 years and 336 aged > 60 years) including 75 who received homologous booster doses. Vaccination was well tolerated with no vaccine-related SAEs. Solicited and unsolicited AEs were mainly mild to moderate and resolved spontaneously. Both age groups demonstrated robust immune responses as neutralizing antibodies or RBD-binding IgG, after two doses, with lower titers in the older age group than the younger adults. Neither group achieved levels observed in human convalescent sera (HCS), but did equal or surpass HCS levels following homologous booster doses. Following CVnCoV vaccination, robust SARS-CoV-2 S-protein-specific CD4 + T-cell responses were observed in both age groups with CD8 + T-cell responses in some individuals, consistent with observations in convalescing COVID-19 patients after natural infection. Conclusions: We confirmed that two 12 µg doses of CVnCoV had an acceptable safety profile, and induced robust immune responses. Marked humoral immune responses to homologous boosters suggest two doses had induced immune memory.

A Third Dose of the COVID-19 Vaccine, CVnCoV, Increased the Neutralizing Activity against the SARS-CoV-2 Wild-Type and Delta Variant.

A third dose of CVnCoV, a former candidate mRNA vaccine against SARS-CoV-2, was previously shown to boost neutralizing antibody responses against SARS-CoV-2 wild-type in adults aged 18−60 and >60 years in a phase 2a clinical study. In the present study, we report the neutralizing antibody responses to a wild-type and a variant of concern, Delta, after a third dose of the vaccine on day (D)57 and D180. Neutralization activity was assessed using a microneutralization assay. Comparable levels of neutralizing antibodies against the wild-type and Delta were induced. These were higher than those observed after the first two doses, irrespective of age or pre-SARS-CoV-2-exposure status, indicating that the first two doses induced immune memory. Four weeks after the third dose on D180, the neutralizing titers for wild-type and Delta were two-fold higher in younger participants than in older participants; seroconversion rates were 100% for wild-type and Delta in the younger group and for Delta in the older group. A third CVnCoV dose induced similar levels of neutralizing responses against wild-type virus and the Delta variant in both naïve and pre-exposed participants, aligning with current knowledge from licensed COVID-19 vaccines that a third dose is beneficial against SARS-CoV-2 variants.

Reducing antipsychotic drugs in stable patients with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a randomized controlled pilot trial.

As the course of schizophrenic disorders is often chronic, treatment guidelines recommend continuous maintenance treatment to prevent relapses, but antipsychotic drugs can cause many side effects. It, therefore, seems reasonable to try to reduce doses in stable phases of the illness or even try to stop medication. We conducted a 26 weeks, randomized, rater blind, feasibility study to examine individualized antipsychotic dose reduction versus continuous maintenance treatment (Register Number: NCT02307396). We included chronic, adult patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, who were treated with any antipsychotic drug except clozapine, who had not been hospitalized in the last 3 years and who were in symptomatic remission at baseline. The primary outcome was relapse of positive symptoms. Symptom severity, social functioning and side effects were also examined as secondary outcomes. 20 patients were randomized. Relapse rates in the two groups were not significantly different. No patient had to be hospitalized. One patient in the control group dropped out. The mean reduction of antipsychotic dose in the individualized dose-reduction group was 42%, however only one patient discontinued drug completely. There were no significant differences in efficacy or safety outcomes. This randomized trial provides evidence, that reduction of antipsychotic medication in chronic stable schizophrenic patients may be feasible. The results need to be confirmed in a larger trial with a longer follow-up period.

Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of 32 Oral Antipsychotics for the Acute Treatment of Adults With Multi-Episode Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

(Reprinted with permission from the Lancet 2019; 394: 939-51).

Comparison of outcome in men and women after treatment in psychiatric security hospitals in Germany.

Previous research has shown that forensic psychiatric treatment reduces reoffending, rehospitalization and premature mortality. Treatment outcome varies with diagnosis, but little is known about the influence of sex, psychosocial adjustment and aftercare. To assess these variables, we interviewed male and female patients discharged from three psychiatric security hospitals in Germany in the years 2010-2017. Participants were interviewed at discharge (n = 609) and 1 year later (n = 366) about reoffending, readmissions, substance use and psychosocial adjustment. Among patients with substance use disorder (SUD), 14% reoffended, 20% were re-hospitalized and 60% maintained abstinence. Among patients with severe mental disorder, 5% reoffended and 13% were re-hospitalized. Significant sex differences were found in offenders with SUD. The results suggest that sociodemographic and disorder-related risk factors are associated with treatment success and that female patients with SUD might need a specific treatment approach. Sex-specific aspects, diagnosis and psychosocial adjustment should be considered in forensic psychiatric treatment and risk assessment.

Add-on spironolactone as antagonist of the NRG1-ERBB4 signaling pathway for the treatment of schizophrenia: Study design and methodology of a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies recently showed that the mineralocorticoid antagonist spironolactone acts also as an antagonist of the NRG1-ERBB4 signaling pathway and improves schizophrenia-like behaviour in Nrg1 transgenic mouse model. As this signaling pathway is critically linked to the pathophysiology of schizophrenia, especially in the context of working-memory dysfunction, spironolactone may be a novel treatment option for patients with schizophrenia targeting cognitive impairments. AIMS: To evaluate whether spironolactone added to an ongoing antipsychotic treatment improves cognitive functioning in schizophrenia. METHODS: The add-on spironolactone for the treatment of schizophrenia trial (SPIRO-TREAT) is a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled trial with three arms (spironolactone 100 mg, spironolactone 200 mg and placebo). Schizophrenia patients are treated for three weeks and then followed-up for additional nine weeks. As primary outcome, we investigate changes in working memory before and at the end of the intervention phase. We will randomize 90 patients. Eighty-one patients are intended to reach the primary endpoint measure at the end of the three-week intervention period. Secondary endpoints include other measures of cognition, psychopathology, safety measures and biological measures. CONCLUSIONS: SPIRO-TREAT is the first study evaluating the efficacy of the mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist spironolactone to improve cognitive impairments in schizophrenia patients targeting the NRG1-ERBB4 signaling pathway. With SPIRO-TREAT, we intend to investigate a novel treatment option for cognitive impairments in schizophrenia that goes beyond the established concepts of interfering with dopaminergic neurotransmission as key pathway in schizophrenia treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform: http://apps.who.int/trialsearch/Trial2.aspx?TrialID=EUCTR2014-001968-35-DE.

Fibril-induced glutamine-/asparagine-rich prions recruit stress granule proteins in mammalian cells.

Prions of lower eukaryotes are self-templating protein aggregates that replicate by converting homotypic proteins into stable, tightly packed beta-sheet-rich protein assemblies. Propagation is mediated by prion domains, low-complexity regions enriched in polar and devoid of charged amino acid residues. In mammals, compositionally similar domains modulate the assembly of dynamic stress granules (SGs) that associate via multivalent weak interactions. Dysregulation of SGs composed of proteins with prion-like domains has been proposed to underlie the formation of pathological inclusions in several neurodegenerative diseases. The events that drive prion-like domains into transient or solid assemblies are not well understood. We studied the interactors of the prototype prion domain NM of Saccharomyces cerevisiae Sup35 in its soluble or fibril-induced prion conformation in the mammalian cytosol. We show that the interactomes of soluble and prionized NM overlap with that of SGs. Prion induction by exogenous seeds does not cause SG assembly, demonstrating that colocalization of aberrant protein inclusions with SG components does not necessarily reveal SGs as initial sites of protein misfolding.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of 32 oral antipsychotics for the acute treatment of adults with multi-episode schizophrenia: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Schizophrenia is one of the most common, burdensome, and costly psychiatric disorders in adults worldwide. Antipsychotic drugs are its treatment of choice, but there is controversy about which agent should be used. We aimed to compare and rank antipsychotics by quantifying information from randomised controlled trials. METHODS: We did a network meta-analysis of placebo-controlled and head-to-head randomised controlled trials and compared 32 antipsychotics. We searched Embase, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, PubMed, BIOSIS, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, and ClinicalTrials.gov from database inception to Jan 8, 2019. Two authors independently selected studies and extracted data. We included randomised controlled trials in adults with acute symptoms of schizophrenia or related disorders. We excluded studies in patients with treatment resistance, first episode, predominant negative or depressive symptoms, concomitant medical illnesses, and relapse-prevention studies. Our primary outcome was change in overall symptoms measured with standardised rating scales. We also extracted data for eight efficacy and eight safety outcomes. Differences in the findings of the studies were explored in metaregressions and sensitivity analyses. Effect size measures were standardised mean differences, mean differences, or risk ratios with 95% credible intervals (CrIs). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using CINeMA (Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). The study protocol is registered with PROSPERO, number CRD42014014919. FINDINGS: We identified 54 417 citations and included 402 studies with data for 53 463 participants. Effect size estimates suggested all antipsychotics reduced overall symptoms more than placebo (although not statistically significant for six drugs), with standardised mean differences ranging from -0·89 (95% CrI -1·08 to -0·71) for clozapine to -0·03 (-0·59 to 0·52) for levomepromazine (40 815 participants). Standardised mean differences compared with placebo for reduction of positive symptoms (31 179 participants) varied from -0·69 (95% CrI -0·86 to -0·52) for amisulpride to -0·17 (-0·31 to -0·04) for brexpiprazole, for negative symptoms (32 015 participants) from -0·62 (-0·84 to -0·39; clozapine) to -0·10 (-0·45 to 0·25; flupentixol), for depressive symptoms (19 683 participants) from -0·90 (-1·36 to -0·44; sulpiride) to 0·04 (-0·39 to 0·47; flupentixol). Risk ratios compared with placebo for all-cause discontinuation (42 672 participants) ranged from 0·52 (0·12 to 0·95; clopenthixol) to 1·15 (0·36 to 1·47; pimozide), for sedation (30 770 participants) from 0·92 (0·17 to 2·03; pimozide) to 10·20 (4·72 to 29·41; zuclopenthixol), for use of antiparkinson medication (24 911 participants) from 0·46 (0·19 to 0·88; clozapine) to 6·14 (4·81 to 6·55; pimozide). Mean differences compared to placebo for weight gain (28 317 participants) ranged from -0·16 kg (-0·73 to 0·40; ziprasidone) to 3·21 kg (2·10 to 4·31; zotepine), for prolactin elevation (21 569 participants) from -77·05 ng/mL (-120·23 to -33·54; clozapine) to 48·51 ng/mL (43·52 to 53·51; paliperidone) and for QTc prolongation (15 467 participants) from -2·21 ms (-4·54 to 0·15; lurasidone) to 23·90 ms (20·56 to 27·33; sertindole). Conclusions for the primary outcome did not substantially change after adjusting for possible effect moderators or in sensitivity analyses (eg, when excluding placebo-controlled studies). The confidence in evidence was often low or very low. INTERPRETATION: There are some efficacy differences between antipsychotics, but most of them are gradual rather than discrete. Differences in side-effects are more marked. These findings will aid clinicians in balancing risks versus benefits of those drugs available in their countries. They should consider the importance of each outcome, the patients' medical problems, and preferences. FUNDING: German Ministry of Education and Research and National Institute for Health Research.

Failure of Autophagy-Lysosomal Pathways in Rod Photoreceptors Causes the Early Retinal Degeneration Phenotype Observed in Cln6nclf Mice.

Purpose: Vision loss caused by photoreceptor death represents one of the first symptoms in neuronal ceroid lipofuscinosis, a condition characterized by accumulation of intracellular waste. Cln6nclf mice have a naturally occurring mutation in ceroid-lipofuscinosis neuronal (CLN) protein 6 and are a model of this disorder. In order to identify the effect intracellular waste (lipofuscin) accumulation plays in driving retinal degeneration, the time course of degeneration was carefully characterized functionally using the electroretinogram and structurally using histology. Methods: Cln6nclf and C57BL/6J, wild-type, mice were studied at postnatal day 18 (P18), P30, P60, P120, and P240, and retinal degeneration was correlated with changes in the retinal pigment epithelial (RPE) and neuronal autophagy-lysosomal pathways using super-resolution microscopy. Results: In Cln6nclf mice there was significant loss of rod photoreceptor function at P18, prior to photoreceptor nuclei loss at P60. In contrast, cone pathway function was not affected until P240. The loss of rod photoreceptor function correlated with significant disruption of the autophagy-lysosomal degradation pathways within photoreceptors, but not in the RPE or other retinal neurons. Additionally, there was cytosolic accumulation of P62 and undigested mitochondrial-derived, ATP synthase subunit C in the photoreceptor layers of Cln6nclf mice at P30. Conclusions: These results suggest that rod photoreceptors have an increased sensitivity to disturbances in the autophagy-lysosomal pathway and the subsequent failure of mitochondrial turnover, relative to other retinal cells. It is likely that primary failure of the rod photoreceptors rather than the RPE or other retinal neurons underlies the early visual dysfunction that occurs in the Cln6nclf mouse model.

Antipsychotic drugs for elderly patients with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Elderly patients with schizophrenia are a particularly vulnerable group often excluded from clinical trials. Currently there is no evidence-synthesis about the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics in this subgroup. We reviewed all randomized-controlled-trials, about antipsychotics in elderly schizophrenics (last search Dec 12, 2017). Pairwise meta-analyses were conducted. The primary outcome was overall symptoms. Secondary outcomes included positive symptoms, negative symptoms, response, dropouts, quality of life, social functioning and side-effects. We included 29 references from 18 unique randomized-controlled-trials with 1225 participants published from 1958 to 2009. The definition of "elderly" was very heterogeneous across the studies (minimum age 46-65, mean age 57-73). There were evidence gaps for most drugs in many outcomes. In terms of efficacy paliperidone was associated with fewer dropouts due to inefficacy than placebo in the only placebo-controlled-trial. Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol in overall symptoms, negative symptoms and response, and it was associated with fewer dropouts than risperidone. Risperidone and haloperidol produced more prolactin increase than olanzapine, and olanzapine was associated with less use of antiparkinson medication than haloperidol. Although we found no marked differences of the effects of these drugs in the elderly, the evidence presented was based on very few usually small studies. To examine specifically whether there are differences in efficacy and side-effects in elderly, which differs in meaningful ways from the general population, studies in patients who are defined by critiera as truly geriatric, which incorporates older age together with multimorbidity and fraility dimensions, may be more informative.

Increasing antipsychotic dose for non response in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Many people with schizophrenia do not reach a satisfactory clinical response with a standard dose of an initially prescribed antipsychotic drug. In such cases, clinicians face the dilemma of increasing the antipsychotic dose in order to enhance antipsychotic efficacy. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy of increasing antipsychotic dose compared to keeping the same dose in the treatment of people with schizophrenia who have not responded (as defined in the individual studies) to an initial antipsychotic drug trial. We also examine the adverse effects associated with such a procedure. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (10 June 2014, 6 October 2015, and 30 March 2017). We examined references of all included studies for further trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs), reporting useable data, comparing increasing the antipsychotic dose rather than maintaining the original dose for people with schizophrenia who do not respond to their initial antipsychotic treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently extracted data . We analysed dichotomous data using relative risks (RR) and the 95% confidence intervals (CI). We analysed continuous data using mean differences (MD) and their 95% CI. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: Ten relevant RCTs with 675 participants are included in this review. All trials were double blind except one single blind. All studies had a run-in phase to confirm they did not respond to their initial antipsychotic treatment. The trials were published between 1980 and 2016. In most studies the methods of randomisation, allocation and blinding were poorly reported. In addition sample sizes were often small, limiting the overall quality of the evidence. Overall, no clear difference was found between groups in terms of the number of participants who showed clinically relevant response (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.40, 9 RCTs, N = 533, low-quality evidence), or left the study early due to adverse effects (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.52 to 5.07, very low quality evidence), or due to any reason (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.90, 5 RCTs, N = 353, low-quality evidence). Similarly, no clear difference was found in general mental state as measured by PANSS total score change (MD -1.44, 95% CI -6.85 to 3.97, 3 RCTs, N = 258, very low quality evidence). At least one adverse effect was equivocal between groups (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.50, 2 RCTs, N = 191, very low quality evidence). Data were not reported for time in hospital or quality-of-life outcomes. Finally, subgroup and sensitivity analyses did not show any effect on the primary outcome but these analyses were clearly underpowered. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Current data do not show any clear differences between increasing or maintaining the antipsychotic dose for people with schizophrenia who do not respond to their initial antipsychotic treatment. Adverse effect reporting was limited and poor. There is an urgent need for further trials in order to determine the optional treatment strategy in such cases.

Increasing antipsychotic dose versus switching antipsychotic for non response in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Many people with schizophrenia do not respond to an initially prescribed antipsychotic drug. In such cases, one treatment strategy could be to increase the antipsychotic dose; and another strategy could be to switch to a different antipsychotic drug. OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy of increasing the antipsychotic dose versus switching the antipsychotic drug in the treatment of non-responsive people with schizophrenia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (10 June 2014, 6 October 2015, and 30 March 2017). We examined references of all included studies for further trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: All relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing increasing the antipsychotic dose versus switching to a different antipsychotic drug for people with schizophrenia who have not responded to their initial antipsychotic treatment. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: At least two review authors independently extracted data. We analysed dichotomous data using relative risks (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We analysed continuous data using mean differences (MD) and their 95% CIs. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to create a 'Summary of findings' table. MAIN RESULTS: We include one RCT with relevant data on 29 participants in this review. The trial had a parallel design and was double-blind, but blinding procedures were not described. The trial included people who were non-responsive to fluphenazine 20 mg/day administered for 4 weeks. Participants were randomly assigned to continuing treatment with fluphenazine 20 mg/day, increasing the dose to fluphenazine 80 mg/day or switching to haloperidol 20 mg/day for four additional weeks. Data were reported only for 47 out of 58 initially randomised participants. The trial was published in 1993. The fact that only one RCT with a small sample size (N = 29) was included in the analysis limits the quality of the evidence. Overall, no clear difference was found between groups in terms of the three available outcomes: global state (number of participants with clinically relevant response (RR 1.63, 95% CI 0.17 to 15.99, very low quality evidence); general mental state (endpoint score, BPRS total) (MD 2.00, 95% CI -4.20 to 8.20, very low quality evidence); and negative symptoms (endpoint score, SANS) (MD 3.40, 95% CI -12.56 to 19.36). No data were reported for leaving the study early, adverse effects, time in hospital, quality of life, satisfaction with care and functioning. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is extremely limited evidence and no clear conclusions can be drawn. There is an urgent need for further trials in order to determine the optimal treatment strategy for people with schizophrenia who do not respond to their initial antipsychotic treatment.

Dose equivalents for second generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics: The minimum effective dose method.

BACKGROUND: The concept of dose equivalence of depot medication is important for many scientific and clinical purposes. METHODS: A systematic literature search on four second-generation antipsychotics available as long-acting injectable drugs and haloperidol was conducted. We used the minimum effective dose method which is based on randomized fixed dose studies where the smallest dose which was significantly more efficacious than placebo in the primary outcome was declared as minimum effective dose. We calculated equivalent doses from acute phase studies but we also reported the minimum effective doses found in relapse prevention studies. RESULTS: The acute phase minimum effective doses/olanzapine equivalents were: aripiprazole lauroxil 441mg (300mg aripiprazole)/4wks/0.71; aripiprazole 400mg/4weeks/0.95 (aripiprazole maintena); paliperidone palmitate 25mg/4weeks/0,06; risperidone 25mg/2weeks/0,12; RBP-7000 90mg/4weeks/0,21; olanzapine 210mg/2weeks/1. CONCLUSIONS: The minimum effective dose method is an operationalized and evidence-based approach for determining antipsychotic dose equivalence which can also be applied to long-acting injectable formulations. Doses may not have been chosen low enough to find the truly minimum effective dose. Comparisons with other methods will be necessary to come to ultimate conclusions.

Antipsychotic drugs for the acute treatment of patients with a first episode of schizophrenia: a systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: The first episode of schizophrenia is a pivotal phase of this debilitating illness. Which drug to use remains controversial without a summary of all direct or indirect comparisons of drugs. We did a systematic review with pairwise and network meta-analyses of efficacy and tolerability. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library, PubMed, Biosis, and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomised controlled trials of antipsychotics for the acute treatment of first-episode schizophrenia, published up to Nov 17, 2016. Our primary outcome was overall change in symptoms. Secondary outcomes were change in positive and negative symptoms, categorical response to treatment, study dropout for any reason and for inefficacy of treatment, use of drugs to treat parkinsonian symptoms, weight gain, sedation, increase in prolactin release, overall functioning, and quality of life. We did the meta-analyses with a random-effects model to calculate standardised mean differences (SMDs) or odds ratios (ORs) with 95% CIs. FINDINGS: We identified 19 relevant randomised controlled trials of 12 antipsychotic drugs that involved 2669 participants. 13 of the studies presented data on the primary outcome. For overall reduction of symptoms, amisulpride (SMD -0·37, 95% CI -0·61 to -0·14), olanzapine (-0·25, -0·39 to -0·12), ziprasidone (-0·25, -0·48 to -0·01), and risperidone (-0·14, -0·27 to -0·01) were significantly more efficacious than haloperidol, but the evidence was very low to moderate quality. Amisulpride was superior for reduction of symptoms to quetiapine (SMD -0·25, 95% CI -0·50 to -0·01). Olanzapine was superior to haloperidol and risperidone for reduction of negative symptoms. Several second-generation antipsychotics were superior to haloperidol in terms of all-cause discontinuation. Olanzapine was associated with at least one use of drugs to treat parkinsonian symptoms and quetiapine with less akathisia than haloperidol, aripiprazole, risperidone, and olanzapine, but, again, evidence was very low to low quality. Molindone was superior to risperidone, haloperidol, and olanzapine in terms of weight gain, and superior to risperidone in terms of increase in prolactin release. INTERPREATION: Haloperidol seems to be a suboptimum treatment option for acute treatment of first-episode schizophrenia, but we found little difference between second-generation antipsychotics. The evidence was generally of low quality and the numbers of patients for each drug were small. Thus, the choice of treatment should be guided primarily by side-effects. FUNDING: German Federal Ministry of Education and Research.

How well do patients with a first episode of schizophrenia respond to antipsychotics: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

It is often stated that first-episode patients tend to respond better to antipsychotics than chronic patients, but the exact numbers and moderators of response in this population are unclear. We, therefore, present the first systematic review on response rates of first episode patients with schizophrenia in randomized trials. We searched multiple databases for randomized-controlled trials of antipsychotics in acutely ill patients with a first episode of schizophrenia (last search: November 17, 2016). The outcomes were response rate based on two criteria, at least 50% PANSS or BPRS total score reduction from baseline and at least 20% reduction. Data were pooled in a single-group summary meta-analysis using Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software. Moreover, several potential moderators of response to antipsychotics were examined by meta-regression. We included 17 studies with a total of 3156 participants. On the average, 81.3%/51.9% of the first-episode patients reached an at least 20%/50% PANSS or BPRS reduction from baseline, respectively. Meta-regressions revealed a better treatment response in female patients, in more severely ill patients at baseline, in antipsychotic naïve patients, in patients with a shorter illness duration and in open studies. Study duration and dosage were no significant moderators of response. Our finding suggest that more than 80% of first-episode patients achieved 20% PANSS/BPRS reduction from baseline and around 50% achieved a 50% PANSS/BPRS reduction. Several patient characteristics moderated response rates.