Donanemab in Japanese Patients with Early Alzheimer's Disease: Subpopulation Analysis of the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Randomized Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Donanemab, a monoclonal antibody directed against an insoluble, modified, N-terminal truncated form of amyloid beta, demonstrated efficacy and safety in patients with early, symptomatic Alzheimer's disease (AD) in the phase 3 TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 trial. Here, we report clinical outcomes, biomarkers, and safety results for the Japanese subpopulation. METHODS: TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 (N = 1736) was conducted in eight countries, including Japan (enrollment June 2020-November 2021; database lock April 2023). Participants (60-85 years) with early, symptomatic AD (mild cognitive impairment/mild dementia), Mini-Mental State Examination score 20-28, and confirmed amyloid and tau pathology were randomized 1:1 (stratified by tau status) to intravenous donanemab (700 mg for three doses, then 1400 mg/dose) or placebo every 4 weeks for 72 weeks. Primary outcome was change from baseline to week 76 in integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) score. Other outcomes included clinical measures of cognitive and functional impairment, biomarkers, and safety. RESULTS: Of 88 Japanese participants (43 placebo, 45 donanemab), 7 in each group discontinued. Least-squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in iADRS score at week 76 was smaller with donanemab than with placebo in the combined (low-medium tau and high tau) and low-medium tau (N = 76) subpopulations (LSM change difference: 4.43 and 3.99, representing 38.8% and 40.2% slowing of disease progression, respectively). Slowing of AD progression with donanemab was also observed for other clinical outcomes. Marked decreases in amyloid plaque and plasma phosphorylated tau 217 were observed; amyloid clearance (< 24.1 Centiloids) was observed in 83.3% of the combined donanemab and 0% of the combined placebo groups. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities of edema/effusions occurred in ten (22.2%) donanemab-treated participants (one [2.2%] symptomatic) and one (2.3%) placebo-treated participant. CONCLUSIONS: The overall efficacy and safety of donanemab in Japanese participants were similar to the global TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04437511.

Efficacy and Safety of Duloxetine in Children and Adolescents with Major Depressive Disorder in Japan: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial Followed by an Open-Label Long-Term Extension Trial.

Objective: The goal of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine in children and adolescents (9-17 years of age) with major depressive disorder (MDD) in Japan. Methods: This study consists of two clinical trials. First, a 6-week, randomized double-blind placebo-controlled clinical trial (RCT) was conducted. The primary endpoint of RCT was the change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total scores from baseline. Following RCT, an open-label long-term extension trial (OLE) was conducted to investigate the longer-term safety of duloxetine for ∼1 year. Results: In RCT, CDRS-R total score changes from baseline to 6 weeks after the start of administration (primary endpoint) were -21.03 in the duloxetine group (n = 74) and -22.42 in the placebo group (n = 74). No significant difference was observed in the primary endpoint between the groups (p = 0.5587). In addition, no significant difference was observed in secondary endpoints such as CDRS-R response rates. The proportion of patients with ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in RCT was significantly higher in the duloxetine group (78.7%) than in the placebo group (62.2%), and most were mild or moderate in severity. Changes in CDRS-R total scores during OLE, in consecutive patients from the duloxetine group in RCT (n = 63), or placebo group (n = 59) in RCT, and newly enrolled patients (n = 28), were -12.1, -11.3, and -17.8, respectively. The proportion of patients with ≥1 TEAE in OLE was 90.5%, 88.1%, and 89.3% in the respective groups, and most of them were mild or moderate in severity. Conclusions: Duloxetine did not show superiority to placebo in efficacy in children and adolescents with MDD in Japan. Overall reported TEAEs were consistent with the currently available duloxetine safety profile and no new safety finding was observed in the two clinical trials.

Phase 2 randomized placebo-controlled study of lasmiditan for the acute treatment of migraine in Japanese patients.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in Japanese adults with migraine. BACKGROUND: Global clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy and safety of lasmiditan in the acute treatment of migraine. METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 study in Japan (NCT03962738), which enrolled adults with migraine with or without aura. Participants were randomized 7:3:7:6 to placebo, lasmiditan 50 mg, 100 mg, or 200 mg to be self-administered orally within 4 h of onset of a single moderate-to-severe migraine attack. Participants recorded their response to treatment prior to dosing and for 48 h postdose. The primary endpoint was headache pain freedom at 2 h postdose. RESULTS: Participants (N = 846) were randomized and treated (N = 691, safety; N = 682, modified intent-to-treat). At 2 h postdose, a significantly higher proportion of participants were headache pain-free in the lasmiditan 200 mg (40.8%, 73/179; odds ratio 3.46 [95% confidence interval 2.17 to 5.54]; p < 0.001; primary objective) and 100 mg groups (32.4%, 67/207; odds ratio 2.41 [1.51 to 3.83]; p < 0.001) compared with the placebo group (16.6%, 35/211), whereas the lasmiditan 50 mg group had a numerically higher proportion of participants headache pain-free (23.5%, 20/85; odds ratio 1.55 [0.83 to 2.87]; p = 0.167) compared with placebo. A statistically significant linear dose-response relationship for pain freedom was achieved at 2 h by a Cochran-Armitage trend test (p < 0.001). Lasmiditan treatment was also associated with headache pain relief, most bothersome symptom freedom, and improvement on disability and Patient Global Impression of Change outcomes. The majority of treatment-emergent adverse events were mild and of short duration, the most common of which were dizziness (39.4%; 188/477), somnolence (19.3%; 92/477), and malaise (10.5%; 50/477) in all lasmiditan groups, with no serious adverse events reported. CONCLUSIONS: Lasmiditan was well tolerated and effective for the acute treatment of Japanese patients with migraine, consistent with global phase 3 studies.

Visualization of Low-Level Gamma Radiation Sources Using a Low-Cost, High-Sensitivity, Omnidirectional Compton Camera.

We present experimental protocols for visualizing various low-level gamma radiation sources in the ambient environment. Experiments were conducted by using a low-cost, high-sensitivity, omnidirectional, gamma-ray imaging Compton camera. In the laboratory, the position of a sub-MeV gamma radiation source such as 137Cs can easily be monitored via omnidirectional gamma-ray imaging obtained by the Compton camera. In contrast, a stationary, wall-mounted dose rate monitor cannot always successfully monitor such a source. Furthermore, we successfully demonstrated the possibility of visualizing the radioactivity movement in the environment, for example, the movement of a patient injected with 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (18F-FDG) in a nuclear medicine facility. In the Fukushima field, we easily obtained omnidirectional gamma-ray images concerned with the distribution on the ground of low-level radioactive contamination by radioactive cesium released by the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant accident in 2011. We demonstrate clear advantages of using our procedure with this camera to visualize gamma-ray sources. Our protocols can further be used to discover low-level gamma radiation sources, in place of stationary dose rate monitors and/or portable survey meters used conventionally.

Effectiveness and safety of oral olanzapine treatment transitioned from rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine for agitation associated with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness and safety of oral olanzapine treatment transitioned from rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine (RAIM) in patients with acute agitation associated with schizophrenia in a real-world clinical setting. METHODS: The postmarketing surveillance study with a 3-day observational period after the last RAIM administration was conducted (original study). Following this, an extended study was added for patients who received oral olanzapine after RAIM administration during the original study period, in order to additionally observe them for 7 days after initial RAIM administration. Effectiveness and safety from initial RAIM administration were evaluated using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component score and treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), respectively. RESULTS: The effectiveness and safety analysis set included a total of 521 and 522 patients, respectively. A majority of patients received 10 mg of RAIM (475/522 patients, 91.0%). The mean ± SD total Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component score was 23.6±6.2 (n=318) at baseline (before initial RAIM administration), 17.4±6.8 (n=280) at 2 hours after initial administration, 16.2±6.8 (n=246) 2 days after final administration, 14.9±6.2 (n=248) 3 days after final administration, 13.8±5.9 (n=242) 4 days after final administration, 13.2±5.8 (n=221) 7 days after initial administration, and 13.4±6.2 (n=351) at final observation (with the last observation carried forward approach), showing that reduction in agitation seen with RAIM was sustained with oral dose of olanzapine. The most common TEAEs were dyslalia and somnolence (each event occurred in four patients), and abnormal hepatic function and constipation (occurred in three patients). One serious adverse event of sudden cardiac death occurred after transitioned to oral olanzapine with many other antipsychotic drugs. CONCLUSION: In the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia, RAIM could be generally transitioned to oral olanzapine without exacerbating adverse events or losing treatment effect.

Safety and effectiveness of rapid-acting intra-muscular olanzapine for agitation associated with schizophrenia - Japan postmarketing surveillance study.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of rapid-acting intramuscular (IM) olanzapine in the treatment of acute agitation associated with schizophrenia in real-world clinical settings in Japan. METHODS: In this multicenter, postmarketing surveillance (PMS) study, patients with acute agitation associated with schizophrenia were treated with IM olanzapine daily in a daily clinical setting. The observational period ranged from 1 to 7 days, including the day of initial administration. Safety was assessed by reporting treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale - Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score was used to evaluate effectiveness at baseline and at 2 hours (after each administration), 2 days, and 3 days (end of the observational period) from the last administration of the IM olanzapine injection. RESULTS: The safety analysis set included 999 patients, and the initial dose of 10 mg was administered to 955 patients. TEAEs were reported in 28 patients (36 events), the most common of which were dyslalia (5 patients), akathisia and somno lence (4 patients each), hepatic function abnormal (3 patients), and constipation and dehydration (2 patients each). One serious adverse event of akathisia occurred during the observation period. The PANSS-EC score (mean ± standard deviation) was 23.3±6.4 (n=625) at baseline, 16.9±7.0 (n=522) at 2 hours after initial injection, and 14.9±6.5 (n=650) at the last observation carried forward. CONCLUSION: The results of this Japanese PMS study demonstrated that IM olanzapine is safe and has a favorable effectiveness profile in the treatment of schizophrenia patients with acute agitation.

Efficacy of olanzapine in the treatment of bipolar mania with mixed features defined by DSM-5.

BACKGROUND: These analyses compared efficacy of olanzapine in patients with bipolar mania with or without mixed features, as defined in the DSM-5. METHODS: Pooled data from 3 placebo-controlled olanzapine studies in patients having bipolar I disorder with manic/mixed episode were analyzed (N=228 olanzapine; N=219 placebo). Patients were categorized for mixed features by number of concurrent depressive symptoms at baseline (0, 1, and 2 [category A; without mixed features], and ≥3 [category B; with mixed features]), as determined by HAM-D17 item score ≥1. Depressive symptoms corresponded to 6 HAM-D17 items in the DSM-5 definition of manic episode with mixed features. Primary efficacy was evaluated by changes in the baseline-to-3-week YMRS total score. RESULTS: Patients were categorized into A (N=322; 72.0%) or B (N=125; 28.0%). Mean baseline YMRS total scores were 28.1 in category A and 27.8 in category B. Least-squares mean change of YMRS total scores in categories A and B (olanzapine versus placebo) were -11.78 versus -6.86 and -13.21 versus -4.72, respectively. Patients in the olanzapine- compared with placebo-group experienced a greater decrease in YMRS total score for both categories (p<0.001). An interaction between mixed features and treatment was seen in YMRS change at a 0.3 significance level (p=0.175). LIMITATIONS: The results are from post-hoc analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine was efficacious in the treatment of bipolar I mania, in patients both with and without mixed features, defined by DSM-5; however, greater efficacy was observed in patients with mixed features having more severe depressive symptoms.

Efficacy of olanzapine monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar depression with mixed features.

BACKGROUND: This analysis investigated the correlations between the efficacy of olanzapine monotherapy and the number of concurrent manic symptoms in patients treated for bipolar depression. METHODS: Pooled data from 2 placebo-controlled olanzapine studies in patients with bipolar I depression were analyzed (total 1214 patients; 690 olanzapine monotherapy patients and 524 placebo patients). Patients were categorized for mixed features by the number of concurrent manic symptoms at baseline (0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively, as measured by a Young Mania Rating Scale item score ≥1). Efficacy was evaluated by change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to 6 weeks. RESULTS: Least-squares mean differences between olanzapine and placebo in the change of MADRS total scores were -3.76 (p=0.002), -3.20 (p<0.001), and -3.44 (p=0.002) for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. The response rates for olanzapine versus (vs.) placebo were 52.6% vs. 39.8%, 50.3% vs. 40.0%, and 42.2% vs. 33.7% for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. The remission rates for olanzapine vs. placebo group were 46.1% vs. 34.3%, 39.5% vs. 32.0%, and 34.8% vs. 24.1% for mixed features 0, 1 or 2, and ≥3, respectively. No significant interaction between mixed features and treatment was seen in the MADRS changes or response and remission rates. LIMITATIONS: Post hoc analyses of the data from 2 previous randomized clinical studies. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine monotherapy was shown to be effective in the treatment of bipolar depression irrespective of the presence of concurrent manic symptoms.

Safety and efficacy of olanzapine in the long-term treatment of Japanese patients with bipolar I disorder, depression: an integrated analysis.

AIM: Safety and efficacy of long-term olanzapine treatment in Japanese patients with bipolar depression were assessed. METHODS: An integrated analysis of data from two studies was performed in olanzapine-treated patients (n = 165) with bipolar depression. Study 1 was a 6-week, double-blind, global study. Patients were randomly assigned to olanzapine or placebo followed by 18 weeks of open-label treatment. Study 2 was an open-label extension of Study 1 involving only Japanese patients. Patients assigned to Pre-olanzapine and Pre-placebo in Study 1 were treated for 24 weeks (total olanzapine exposure 42 or 48 weeks) and newly recruited patients (New-olanzapine) were treated for 48 weeks. Safety outcomes included treatment-emergent adverse events and changes in metabolic parameters. Efficacy outcome was assessed with Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score. RESULTS: Forty-three percent of patients completed the 42- or 48-week olanzapine treatment period. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event was weight increased (47.9%). Significant increases were seen in weight (3.5 kg), and in fasting glucose (3.5 mg/dL), fasting total cholesterol (8.1 mg/dL), and fasting triglycerides (35.1 mg/dL). Remission rates (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score ≤12 at any time) were 79.8% for the Pre-olanzapine group, 90.2% for the Pre-placebo group, and 85.0% for the New-olanzapine group. No patents developed mania during treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term use of olanzapine in a Japanese population with bipolar depression is associated with increases in weight and fasting metabolic measures, and also with improved depressive symptoms with avoidance of mania. Clinicians must carefully consider the benefits and risks of long-term therapy with olanzapine.

Efficacy and safety of olanzapine for treatment of patients with bipolar depression: Japanese subpopulation analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of olanzapine monotherapy are evaluated in Japanese patients from a large, global study of bipolar depression. METHODS: This is an analysis of Japanese patients from a 6-week, global (Japan, China, Korea, Taiwan, and the United States), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study of patients with a depressive episode of bipolar I disorder. The primary outcome was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-BP), the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) total score, the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score, and rates of response (≥50% baseline-to-endpoint reduction in MADRS total score), recovery, and remission. RESULTS: Of the 156 Japanese patients, 104 had been allocated to olanzapine and 52 to placebo. All results are baseline-to-endpoint change. Compared to placebo, patients in the olanzapine group experienced greater improvement in the primary outcome measure, MADRS total score (-14.9 vs. -10.7; p = .01). They also had greater reductions in the following secondary measures: CGI- BP Depression (-1.41 vs. -0.89; p = .008), CGI-BP Bipolar (-1.31 vs. -0.83; p = .01), HAMD-17 (-11.7 vs. -7.9; p < .01), and YMRS (-0.32 vs. 0.34; p = .03). Differences in rates of response, recovery, and remission were not statistically significant. A greater proportion of olanzapine-treated patients reported treatment- emergent adverse events (87.5% vs. 59.6%; p < .001). Patients treated with olanzapine had greater increases in weight (p < .001) and fasting total cholesterol (p = .008); fasting triglycerides (p = .02), and fasting low-density lipoprotein (p = .01). There was a greater reduction in fasting high-density lipoprotein in olanzapine-treated patients (p = .01). Compared with placebo-group patients, more olanzapine-group patients shifted from borderline to high cholesterol (25.0% vs. 0.0%; p = .007) and had clinically significant weight gain (≥7% body weight) (20.2% vs. 1.9%; p = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this analysis support the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine for the treatment of bipolar depression in Japanese patients. Results in this population were consistent with those seen in the more ethnically diverse parent study. In making treatment decisions for individual patients, clinicians should carefully consider the risks and benefits of olanzapine treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicatrials.gov ID NCT00510146 Olanzapine Treatment of Patients with Bipolar I Disorder.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine in Japanese patients for schizophrenia with acute agitation.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine rapid-acting intramuscular (IM) injection is an atypical antipsychotic drug already used overseas and recently approved in Japan. The objective of this study was to confirm the efficacy of rapid-acting IM olanzapine 10 mg was greater than IM placebo in patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia with acute psychotic agitation by comparing changes from baseline to 2 hours after the first IM injection, as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) total score. METHODS: We conducted a placebo-controlled, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study in Japanese patients diagnosed with schizophrenia according to the diagnostic criteria specified in the DSM-IV-TR. Patients were randomized to 2 treatment groups: IM olanzapine (10 mg) or IM placebo. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in PANSS-EC from baseline to 2 hours after the first IM injection. Treatment groups were compared with an analysis of variance model which included treatment and site as factors. During the 24-hour treatment period, safety was assessed by clinical examination and laboratory investigations, electrocardiograms, extrapyramidal symptoms scales, and recording spontaneously reported adverse events. RESULTS: Of the 91 randomized patients, 90 patients (45 IM olanzapine-group; 45 IM placebo-group) were in the full analysis set. The mean change of PANSS-EC total score from baseline to 2 hours after the first IM injection (mean±standard deviation) was -9.2±4.5 for the IM olanzapine group and -2.8±5.6 for the IM placebo group. The difference between treatment groups was statistically significant (p<.001). There were no deaths, serious adverse events, treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) leading to discontinuation, severe TEAEs, or instances of oversedation in this study. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment groups in the proportion of patients with potentially clinically significant changes in laboratory tests, vital signs (blood pressure and pulse rate), electrocardiograms, and treatment-emergent extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSION: The efficacy of IM olanzapine 10 mg in patients with exacerbation of schizophrenia with acute psychotic agitation was greater than IM placebo in the primary efficacy measure, PANSS-EC. Intramuscular olanzapine 10 mg was shown to be generally safe and tolerable, and could be a new option for treatment of schizophrenia in Japan. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00970281.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of olanzapine in patients with bipolar I depression.

BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics are widely used in bipolar mania. However, the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression has not been comprehensively explored. AIMS: To evaluate olanzapine monotherapy in patients with bipolar depression. METHOD: Patients with bipolar depression received olanzapine (5-20 mg/day, n = 343) or placebo (n = 171) for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to end-point in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcomes included: Clinical Global Impression - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP) scale, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores, and the rate of response (≥50% reduction in MADRS at end-point), recovery (MADRS ≤12 for ≥4 weeks plus treatment completion) and remission (MADRS ≤8). The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00510146). RESULTS: Olanzapine demonstrated: significantly greater (P<0.04) improvements on MADRS (least-squares mean change -13.82 v. -11.67), HRSD-17 and YMRS total scores and all CGI-BP subscale scores v. placebo; significantly (P≤0.05) more response and remission, but not recovery; significantly (P<0.01) greater mean increases in weight, fasting cholesterol and triglycerides; and significantly more (P<0.001) patients gained ≥7% body weight. CONCLUSIONS: Olanzapine monotherapy appears to be efficacious in bipolar depression. Additional long-term studies are warranted to confirm these results. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of olanzapine.

Safety and efficacy of olanzapine monotherapy and olanzapine with a mood stabilizer in 18-week treatment of manic/mixed episodes for Japanese patients with bipolar I disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and efficacy of 18-week olanzapine monotherapy in Japanese patients with bipolar mania, following a 6-week, placebo- and haloperidol-controlled double-blind study (acute study). For those who discontinued the acute study due to lack of efficacy, safety and efficacy was assessed with a combination therapy of olanzapine and a mood stabilizer. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this open-label, multicenter extension study, patients who completed the acute study received olanzapine (5-20 mg/day) as monotherapy, and patients who discontinued the acute study due to lack of efficacy with greater Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score than the acute study baseline, received olanzapine in combination with one of three mood stabilizers: lithium, carbamazepine, or valproate. Safety was assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital signs, weight, and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPSs). Efficacy measures included YMRS total score, and response and remission rates of manic symptoms. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: There were no deaths or serious adverse events considered potentially related to olanzapine in the monotherapy group (N = 100) or the combination-therapy group (N = 39). TEAEs occurred in 59.0% and 79.5% of patients in the monotherapy and combination-therapy groups, respectively, and their severities were mostly mild or moderate. Regarding the efficacy measures, in the monotherapy group, mean YMRS change from extension study baseline to endpoint was -3.0, and the response and remission rates at endpoint were 97.0% and 93.0%, respectively. In the combination-therapy group, mean YMRS change from extension-study baseline was -19.8; response and remission rates increased from the extension-study baseline (both 0.0%) to 64.1% and 61.5% respectively by endpoint. CONCLUSION: Olanzapine was generally well tolerated during the 18-week extension period in Japanese patients with bipolar mania. Results of both groups were also generally consistent with US and European studies. Monitoring of metabolic parameters is recommended.

Efficacy and safety of olanzapine in the treatment of Japanese patients with bipolar I disorder in a current manic or mixed episode: a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and haloperidol-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: No current data were available regarding the efficacy and safety of olanzapine in Japanese patients with bipolar I disorder with a current manic/mixed episode. METHODS: Patients received blindly olanzapine (5-20 mg/day; N=105), haloperidol (2.5-10 mg/day; N=20), or placebo (N=99) for 3 weeks. For the following 3 weeks, the olanzapine and haloperidol groups continued their treatment, while the placebo group switched blindly to olanzapine. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score; secondary efficacy measures included bipolar disorder remission rate and switch-to depression. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), weight and extrapyramidal symptoms (EPSs). RESULTS: YMRS total score significantly decreased in the olanzapine group compared with the placebo group (-5.62 [95% CI: -8.87, -2.37], p<0.001) after 3 weeks. Compared with haloperidol, olanzapine was not markedly different in improving overall bipolar symptomatology, and fewer olanzapine-treated patients switched to symptomatic depression (2.4% vs 16.7%, p=0.014). Overall incidences of TEAEs were not significantly different among the groups, and EPSs in olanzapine group were less severe than in the haloperidol group. LIMITATIONS: The small haloperidol sample size limited the conclusions that can be drawn from the statistical comparisons between the active treatments. CONCLUSIONS: This was the first study to evaluate an atypical antipsychotic in Japanese patients with manic bipolar I disorder. Consistent with previous non-Japanese studies, olanzapine was generally well-tolerated and superior to placebo in improving the severity of manic symptoms. Compared to haloperidol, fewer olanzapine-treated patients switched to symptomatic depression, and EPSs were less severe.