Optimal dose for the efficacy of asenapine in patients with schizophrenia: Real-world data.

AIMS: A meta-analysis of short-term studies revealed no significant differences between the doses of asenapine, 10 and 20 mg/day, in the acute treatment of schizophrenia. However, it should be noted that many patients from clinical practice were excluded, and the dose-response to asenapine in a real-world setting is still unclear. Additionally, the dose-response in the maintenance phase is not clear. This study aimed to evaluate the differences in the efficacy of different asenapine doses in patients with maintenance phase of schizophrenia in a real-world setting. METHODS: This study conducted post-marketing surveillance of asenapine in clinical settings in Japan. It followed patients diagnosed with schizophrenia who received asenapine for the first time for a maximum of 52 weeks. These patients were divided into two categories based on their average daily asenapine dosage: ≤10 mg/day and >10 mg/day. Asenapine efficacy was assessed by adjusting for patient demographics using multivariate logistic regression analysis, employing the Clinical Global Impression-Global Improvement (CGI-I) scale, which has seven categories. RESULTS: A total of 2774 patients were included in the analysis. Of these, 1689 and 1085 patients were treated with asenapine ≤10 mg/day and >10 mg/day, respectively. The CGI-I improvement rate was significantly higher in the asenapine >10 group (p = 0.012) after adjusting for patient background factors. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that asenapine doses >10 mg/day may be more effective than 10 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia; however, further studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Changes in Multiple microRNA Levels with Antidepressant Treatment Are Associated with Remission and Interact with Key Pathways: A Comprehensive microRNA Analysis.

Individual treatment outcomes to antidepressants varies widely, yet the determinants to this difference remain elusive. MicroRNA (miRNA) gene expression regulation in major depressive disorder (MDD) has attracted interest as a biomarker. This 4-week randomized controlled trial examined changes in the plasma miRNAs that correlated with the treatment outcomes of mirtazapine (MIR) and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) monotherapy. Pre- and post- treatment, we comprehensively analyzed the miRNA levels in MDD patients, and identified the gene pathways linked to these miRNAs in 46 patients. Overall, 141 miRNA levels significantly demonstrated correlations with treatment remission after 4 weeks of MIR, with miR-1237-5p showing the most robust and significant correlation after Bonferroni correction. These 141 miRNAs displayed a negative correlation with remission, indicating a decreasing trend. These miRNAs were associated with 15 pathways, including TGF-ß and MAPK. Through database searches, the genes targeted by these miRNAs with the identified pathways were compared, and it was found that MAPK1, IGF1, IGF1R, and BRAF matched. Alterations in specific miRNAs levels before and after MIR treatment correlated with remission. The miRNAs mentioned in this study have not been previously reported. No other studies have investigated treatment with MIR. The identified miRNAs also correlated with depression-related genes and pathways.

Effectiveness and Changes in Brain Functions by an Occupational Therapy Program Incorporating Mindfulness in Outpatients with Anxiety and Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined the efficacy of an 8-week occupational therapy program incorporating mindfulness (MOT) as a form of psychiatric rehabilitation to ameliorate residual social and occupational impairment in patients with anxiety disorders and depression. The objective was to evaluate the effects of MOT on their personal well-being and to assess the impact of MOT on brain function using quantitative electroencephalography (qEEG). METHODS: This study was a randomized, wait-list control trial with assessments performed at baseline, post-intervention (9 weeks), and follow-up (18 weeks) in outpatients with anxiety disorders and depression. The MOT was conducted in small groups, comprising eight weekly 1.5-h sessions. The primary outcome was the mean score change between the pre- and post-interventions with Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery (QPR) scale. Other clinical assessments and qEEG served as secondary and biological outcomes, respectively. RESULTS: A total of 25 patients (mean age: 44.1) were included in the analysis. The MOT group demonstrated a significantly improved QPR compared to the control group after adjusting for baseline covariates (p < 0.01). This improvement was sustained for 9 weeks after the 8-week intervention. In the qEEG analysis, a significant increase in current source density in the ß2 band of the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex was observed in the MOT group compared to the control group (p < 0.02). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that MOT improves subjective well-being and potentially, global function. This suggests that MOT may serve as a viable option for those whose symptoms have abated but who still struggle with social and occupational functioning.

Divergence of dose-response with asenapine: a cluster analysis of randomized, double-blind, and placebo control study.

BACKGROUND: Differences in psychiatric background and dose-response to asenapine in patients with schizophrenia were examined based on efficacy and safety, using data obtained in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia were classified into three clusters by a cluster analysis based on the Positive and Negative Symptom Scale (PANSS) subscores at baseline, using the data from a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. PANSS Marder factor scores were calculated for each cluster. The efficacy of 10 or 20 mg/day of asenapine on PANSS score was used as the primary endpoint, with the incidence of adverse events evaluated as the secondary endpoint. RESULTS: A total of 529 asenapine-treated patients were classified into 3 clusters: Cluster-P with the higher scores in positive symptoms, disorganized thoughts, and hostility/excitement, Cluster-N with higher scores in negative symptoms, and Cluster-L with overall lower scores. In Cluster-N and Cluster-L, both 10 and 20 mg/day groups showed significant improvement in PANSS scores, while only the 20 mg/day group showed a significant difference in Cluster-P. Cluster-N and Cluster-L had differences in the incidence of adverse events, but this was not seen in Cluster-P. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of asenapine 10 and 20 mg/day differed between the 3 clusters of patients. This suggests that background information regarding baseline psychiatric symptoms may affect the therapeutic response in patients with schizophrenia.