Precipitated opioid withdrawal in a patient started on olanzapine/samidorphan.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine/Samidorphan (Lybalvi®) is a novel oral agent for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder. It was designed to reduce weight gain associated with olanzapine. Samidorphan is an analog of naltrexone, initially intended to treat substance use disorders by antagonizing mu, delta, and kappa opioid receptors. CASE REPORT: We present the case of a 36-year-old who took their first dose of olanzapine/samidorphan shortly before calling for emergency services. The patient took diphenhydramine and an epinephrine autoinjector for what they thought was an allergic reaction but continued to have symptoms. EMS reported involuntary muscle movements thought to be due to dystonia from olanzapine. In the ED, they experienced generalized muscle spasms lasting for several seconds and diaphoresis. Initially, the staff treated for a presumed dystonic reaction to olanzapine and administered diphenhydramine 25 mg IV, diazepam 2 mg IV, midazolam 5 mg IV, and benztropine 1 mg IV without improvement. It was later determined that the patient took 16 mg of buprenorphine SL daily. With this information, precipitated opioid withdrawal was felt to be the likely cause of symptoms. The patient received 16 mg of buprenorphine for an initial Clinical Opiate Withdrawal Scale (COWS) score of 11 with repeat COWS of 6. Why should an emergency physician be aware of this? Initiating olanzapine/samidorphan in the setting of chronic opioid therapy may result in precipitated opioid withdrawal. Additional SL buprenorphine may be a reasonable treatment modality.

Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa (OPEN): A protocol for an open-label feasibility study.

INTRODUCTION: Antipsychotics are routinely prescribed off-label for anorexia nervosa (AN) despite limited evidence. This article presents a protocol of a study aiming to assess the feasibility of a future definitive trial on olanzapine in young people with AN. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In an open-label, one-armed feasibility study, 55 patients with AN or atypical AN, aged 12-24, receiving outpatient, inpatient or day-care treatment who are considered for olanzapine treatment will be recruited from NHS sites based in England. Assessments will be conducted at screening, baseline and at 8-, 16 weeks, 6- and 12 months. Primary feasibility parameters will be proportions of patients who agree to take olanzapine and who adhere to treatment and complete study assessments. Qualitative methods will be used to explore acceptability of the intervention and study design. Secondary feasibility parameters will be changes in body mass index, psychopathology, side effects, health-related quality of life, carer burden and proportion of participants who would enrol in a future randomised controlled trial. The study is funded by the National Institute for Health Research via Health Technology Assessment programme. DISCUSSION: Olanzapine for young PEople with aNorexia nervosa will inform a future randomised controlled trial on the efficacy and safety of prescribing olanzapine in young people with AN.

Pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression. METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to Nov 23, 2023 for randomised controlled trials published in any language that assessed pharmacological treatments for individuals of any age with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode with psychotic features, in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in any setting. We excluded continuation or maintenance trials. We screened the study titles and abstracts identified, and we extracted data from relevant studies after full-text review. If full data were not available, we requested data from study authors twice. We analysed treatments for individual drugs (or drug combinations) and by grouping them on the basis of mechanisms of action. The primary outcomes were response rate (ie, the proportion of participants who responded to treatment) and acceptability (ie, the proportion who discontinued treatment for any reason). We calculated risk ratios and did separate frequentist network meta-analyses by using random-effects models. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the confidence in the evidence with the Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023392926. FINDINGS: Of 6313 reports identified, 16 randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and 14 were included in the network meta-analyses. The 16 trials included 1161 people with psychotic depression (mean age 50·5 years [SD 11·4]). 516 (44·4%) participants were female and 422 (36·3%) were male; sex data were not available for the other 223 (19·2%). 489 (42·1%) participants were White, 47 (4·0%) were African American, and 12 (1·0%) were Asian; race or ethnicity data were not available for the other 613 (52·8%). Only the combination of fluoxetine plus olanzapine was associated with a higher proportion of participants with a treatment response compared with placebo (risk ratio 1·91 [95% CI 1·27-2·85]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes compared with placebo. When treatments were grouped by mechanism of action, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a second-generation antipsychotic was associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses than was placebo (1·89 [1·17-3·04]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes. In head-to-head comparisons of active treatments, a significantly higher proportion of participants had a response to amitriptyline plus perphenazine (3·61 [1·23-10·56]) and amoxapine (3·14 [1·01-9·80]) than to perphenazine, and to fluoxetine plus olanzapine compared with olanzapine alone (1·60 [1·09-2·34]). Venlafaxine, venlafaxine plus quetiapine (2·25 [1·09-4·63]), and imipramine (1·95 [1·01-3·79]) were also associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses overall. In head-to-head comparisons grouped by mechanism of action, antipsychotic plus antidepressant combinations consistently outperformed monotherapies from either drug class in terms of the proportion of participants with treatment responses. Heterogeneity was low. No high-risk instances were identified in the bias assessment for our primary outcomes. INTERPRETATION: According to the available evidence, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a second-generation antipsychotic-and particularly of fluoxetine and olanzapine-could be the optimal treatment choice for psychotic depression. These findings should be taken into account in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, these conclusions should be interpreted cautiously in view of the low number of included studies and the limitations of these studies. FUNDING: None.

Investigating the efficacy and safety of olanzapine prophylaxis for opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (JORTC-PAL20): a study protocol for an open-label, single-arm exploratory study.

INTRODUCTION: In opioid therapy for cancer pain, opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) occur in 20%-40% of patients during initial opioid treatment or increasing opioid doses. OINV result in failure to achieve pain relief due to poor opioid adherence. Therefore, antiemetics are used to prevent OINV, but their efficacy and safety in this context have not yet been fully elucidated. Olanzapine is a promising antiemetic for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This single-arm, single-centre exploratory study will evaluate the prophylactic antiemetic efficacy and safety of 5 mg olanzapine in patients with cancer pain who are withholding initial regular opioid therapy. Thirty-five patients will be enrolled. The primary endpoint is the proportion of patients achieving complete control (CC) of OINV during 5 days of opioid treatment. CC was defined as the absence of emetic episodes, no need for rescue medication to treat nausea, and minimal or no nausea (3 or less on an 11-point categorical scale). Secondary endpoints include the complete response, defined as no emetic episodes and no use of rescue medication during the overall assessment period, the time from opioid initiation to first emetic episode, the time from opioid initiation to first rescue antiemetic administration, and adverse events graded by Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 1.0 and CTCAE version 5.0. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study protocol was approved by National Cancer Center Hospital Certified Review Board. The results will be used as preliminary data to conduct a validation study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials (jRCT) jRCTs031220008.

Association between olanzapine plasma concentrations and treatment response: A systematic review, meta-analysis and individual participant data meta-analysis.

AIMS: By meta-analysing pooled studies and available individual participant data, we aim to provide new insight on olanzapine therapeutic drug monitoring in schizophrenia. METHOD: We conducted a computerized search of bibliographic databases (Pubmed, Cochrane library, Web of Science and PsycINFO) to identify studies that assessed the relationship between olanzapine plasma concentration and the change in patients' clinical scores. We investigated this relationship with olanzapine plasma level 12h00 post-intake using a random-effects model. RESULTS: 7 studies were included in the pooled data analysis (781 patients). We found no difference in oral dose between responders and non-responders but a significantly higher concentration of 4.50 µg/L in responders (p < 0.01). Olanzapine concentration above the thresholds identified in each study was associated with response (odd ratio = 3.50, p = 0.0007). We identified that non-responder patients showed greater inter-individual variability than responders. In the individual data analysis (159 patients), we found no relationship between dose and clinical response but an association between plasma level and response in the shape of a parabolic curve. The Receiver Operating Characteristic curve found a threshold of 22.07 µg/L to identify responders (96% sensitivity, 86% specificity) and a threshold of 56.47 µg/L to identify a decreased probability of response. CONCLUSION: In contrast to oral dose, our work confirmed that plasma olanzapine levels are associated with clinical response and should therefore be used to optimise treatment. We determined a treatment response threshold of 22.07 µg/L and suggest that a concentration above the therapeutic window may result in a decreased response.

Effectiveness of antipsychotics for managing agitated delirium in patients with advanced cancer: a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study in Japan (Phase-R).

PURPOSE: Delirium is a common and serious comorbidity in patients with advanced cancer, necessitating effective management. Nonetheless, effective drugs for managing agitated delirium in patients with advanced cancer remain unclear in real-world settings. Thus, the present study aimed to explore an effective pharmacotherapy for this condition. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of a multicenter prospective observational study in Japan. The analysis included patients with advanced cancer who presented with agitated delirium and received pharmacotherapy. Agitation was defined as a score of the Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale for palliative care (RASS-PAL) of ≥ 1. The outcome was defined as -2 ≤ RASS-PAL ≤ 0 at 72 h after the initiation of pharmacotherapy. Multiple propensity scores were quantified using a multinomial logistic regression model, and adjusted odds ratios (ORs) were calculated for haloperidol, chlorpromazine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone. RESULTS: The analysis included 271 patients with agitated delirium, and 87 (32%) showed -2 ≤ RASS-PAL ≤ 0 on day 3. The propensity score-adjusted OR of olanzapine was statistically significant (OR, 2.91; 95% confidence interval, 1.12 to 7.80; P = 0.030). CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that olanzapine may effectively improve delirium agitation in patients with advanced cancer.

A multicenter, single-arm, open-label interventional study of adherence to brexpiprazole during switching from previous antipsychotic drugs in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

The rate of medication persistence was examined in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder during switching from previously administered antipsychotics to brexpiprazole, a new dopamine D2 receptor partial agonist. A multicenter, single-arm, open-label 24-week interventional study was conducted, consisting of two 12-week consecutive periods: an initial switch (by plateau cross-titration) with the subsequent period, followed by a second maintenance period. Prior antipsychotics were olanzapine or risperidone/paliperidone. The primary and secondary outcome measures were medication persistence rates after the first 12 weeks and changes from baseline in the Specific Levels of Functioning Scale (SLOF), Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic drug treatment Short form (SWNS), and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores, respectively. In total, 79 patients were administered brexpiprazole and the medication persistence rate at 12 weeks was 78.5%, which was significantly higher than the predefined threshold of 65%. Regarding the prior medication, the persistence rate at 12 weeks was 84.6% for olanzapine and 72.5% for risperidone/paliperidone. Significant improvements from baseline were observed in the SLOF, SWNS, and PANSS scores. There were no adverse events of concern. Thus, brexpiprazole appeared to be a suitable antipsychotic on switching from olanzapine, risperidone, or paliperidone.

Real-World Effectiveness of High-Dose Olanzapine and Clozapine for Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia in Japan: A Retrospective Bidirectional Mirror-Image Study.

BACKGROUND: Clozapine is considered the gold standard medication for treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS). However, given that clozapine treatment is associated with the burden of regular blood monitoring and the risk of life-threatening adverse effects, high-dose olanzapine can serve as an alternative treatment. We conducted a bidirectional mirror-image study to evaluate the effectiveness of high-dose olanzapine compared with clozapine. METHODS: We included patients with TRS who switched from olanzapine to clozapine or switched from clozapine to olanzapine, and received high-dose (>20 mg/d) olanzapine treatment for ≥4 weeks at Yamanashi Prefectural Kita Hospital. We obtained data on hospitalization, seclusion, and modified electroconvulsive therapy (mECT) during the clozapine phase and the olanzapine phase. RESULTS: A total of 44 patients were included. When patients switched from high-dose olanzapine to clozapine (n = 32), significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When patients switched from clozapine to high-dose olanzapine (n = 12), a significant reduction was found in the number of patients who received mECT at least once. When data from both directions of treatment were combined, significant reductions were found in the total days of seclusion, the total number of mECT, and the number of patients who received mECT at least once in favor of clozapine. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that high-dose olanzapine may not be as effective as clozapine for patients with TRS in real-world practice. However, it should be noted that there are unique circumstances that restrict the use of clozapine in Japan.

Efficacy and effectiveness of antipsychotics in schizophrenia: network meta-analyses combining evidence from randomised controlled trials and real-world data.

BACKGROUND: There is debate about the generalisability of results from randomised clinical trials (RCTs) to real-world settings. Studying outcomes of treatments for schizophrenia can shed light on this issue and inform treatment guidelines. We therefore compared the efficacy and effectiveness of antipsychotics for relapse prevention in schizophrenia and estimated overall treatment effects using all available RCT and real-world evidence. METHODS: We conducted network meta-analyses using individual participant data from Swedish and Finnish national registries and aggregate data from RCTs. The target population was adults (age >18 and <65 years) with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder with stabilised symptoms. We analysed each registry separately to obtain hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% CIs for relapse within 6 months post-antipsychotic initiation as our main outcome. Interventions studied were antipsychotics, no antipsychotic use, and placebo. We compared HRs versus a reference drug (oral haloperidol) between registries, and between registry individuals who would be eligible and ineligible for RCTs, using the ratio of HRs. We synthesised evidence using network meta-analysis and compared results from our network meta-analysis of real-world data with our network meta-analysis of RCT data, including oral versus long-acting injectable (LAI) formulations. Finally, we conducted a joint real-world and RCT network meta-analysis. FINDINGS: We included 90 469 individuals from the Swedish and Finnish registries (mean age 45·9 [SD 14·6] years; 43 025 [47·5%] women and 47 467 [52·5%] men, ethnicity data unavailable) and 10 091 individuals from 30 RCTs (mean age 39·6 years [SD 11·7]; 3724 [36·9%] women and 6367 [63·1%] men, 6022 White [59·7%]). We found good agreement in effectiveness of antipsychotics between Swedish and Finnish registries (HR ratio 0·97, 95% CI 0·88-1·08). Drug effectiveness versus no antipsychotic was larger in RCT-eligible than RCT-ineligible individuals (HR ratio 1·40 [1·24-1·59]). Efficacy versus placebo in RCTs was larger than effectiveness versus no antipsychotic in real-world (HR ratio 2·58 [2·02-3·30]). We found no evidence of differences between effectiveness and efficacy for between-drug comparisons (HR ratio vs oral haloperidol 1·17 [0·83-1·65], where HR ratio >1 means superior effectiveness in real-world to RCTs), except for LAI versus oral comparisons (HR ratio 0·73 [0·53-0·99], indicating superior effectiveness in real-world data relative to RCTs). The real-world network meta-analysis showed clozapine was most effective, followed by olanzapine LAI. The RCT network meta-analysis exhibited heterogeneity and inconsistency. The joint real-world and RCT network meta-analysis identified olanzapine as the most efficacious antipsychotic amongst those present in both RCTs and the real world registries. INTERPRETATION: LAI antipsychotics perform slightly better in the real world than according to RCTs. Otherwise, RCT evidence was in line with real-world evidence for most between-drug comparisons, but RCTs might overestimate effectiveness of antipsychotics observed in routine care settings. Our results further the understanding of the generalisability of RCT findings to clinical practice and can inform preferential prescribing guidelines. FUNDING: None.

A systematic review and network meta-analysis on comparative efficacy, acceptability, and safety of treatments in acute bipolar mania in youths.

BACKGROUND: The evidence of treatment options' efficacy on acute bipolar manic episodes is relatively less in youths than adults. We aimed to compare and rank the drug's efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety for acute mania in children and adolescents. METHOD: We systematically reviewed the double-blinded, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing drugs or placebo for acute manic episodes of bipolar disorder in children and adolescents using PRISMA guidelines. We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, EBSCO, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and https://clinicaltrials.gov from inception until November 20, 2022. Response to treatment was the primary outcome, and random-effects network meta-analyses were conducted (PROSPERO 2022: CRD42022367455). RESULTS: Of 10,134 citations, we included 15 RCTs, including 2372 patients (47 % female), 15 psychotropic drugs, and the placebo. Risperidone 0.5-2.5 mg/day, aripiprazole 30 mg/day olanzapine, quetiapine 400 mg/day, quetiapine 600 mg/day, asenapine 5 mg/day, asenapine 10 mg, ziprasidone, and aripiprazole 10 mg were found to be effective (in comparison with placebo) in children and adolescents, respectively (τ2 = 0.0072, I2 = 10.2 %). The tolerability of aripiprazole 30 mg/day was lower than risperidone 0.5-2.5 mg/day and olanzapine. Oxcarbazepine had the highest discontinuation due to the adverse effects risk ratio. LIMITATIONS: Efficacy ranking of the treatments could be performed by evaluating relatively few RCT results, and only monotherapies were considered. CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety are changing with the doses of antipsychotics for children and adolescents with acute bipolar manic episodes. Drug selection and optimum dosage should be carefully adjusted in children and adolescents.

Relationship between C-reactive protein and antipsychotics levels in schizophrenic patients infected with COVID-19.

In the context of the COVID-19, inflammation emerges as a prominent characteristic. C-reactive protein (CRP) serves as a commonly employed marker for the evaluation of inflammation. This study aimed to examine the correlation between CRP levels and antipsychotic drug concentrations in patients diagnosed with SCZ during the COVID-19 pandemic. A total of 186 SCZ patients were included in this study, which utilized electronic medical records. The collected data encompassed SCZ diagnoses based on the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) criteria, respiratory symptoms, and treatments. Laboratory assessments involved the measurement of CRP levels and monitoring of blood drug concentrations. The most prevalent symptoms observed in the patient cohort were fever (59.14%), cough (52.15%), fatigue (45.7%), sore throat (46.24%), runny nose (28.49%), and stuffy nose (25.27%). The levels of CRP during the infection period were significantly higher compared to both the prophase and anaphase of infection (all p < 0.001). The serum levels of clozapine, olanzapine, aripiprazole, quetiapine, and risperidone were elevated during the infection period (all p < 0.001). During the anaphase of infection, patients exhibited higher serum levels of clozapine, olanzapine, and risperidone (all p < 0.001) compared to the infection period, but there was no significant change in serum levels of aripiprazole and quetiapine. Multiple regression analysis revealed a statistically significant positive correlation (P < 0.0001) between CRP and clozapine concentration. In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is crucial to adjust the dosage based on drug serum concentration to prevent intoxication or adverse drug reactions.

Umbrella Review: Association Between Antipsychotic Drugs and Metabolic Syndrome Hallmarks in Children and Adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: To summarize the available evidence on metabolic parameters indicating metabolic adverse effects and risk of metabolic syndrome in children and adolescents treated with antipsychotics, following a pre-specified protocol (PROSPERO ID 252336). METHOD: We searched PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO until May 14, 2021, to identify systematic reviews (SR), meta-analyses (MA) and network meta-analyses (NMA) examining symptoms associated to metabolic syndrome in patients <18 years of age who required treatment with oral antipsychotic drugs. Evidence from quantitative analyses for all outcomes related to anthropometric, glyco-metabolic, and blood pressure parameters (measured from baseline to intervention-end and/or follow-up, in subjects exposed to antipsychotics and placebo) was reported on the basis of their metrics (median difference [medianD], mean difference [MD], standardized mean difference [SMD], odds ratio [OR], risk ratio ([RR]). A qualitative synthesis was also made. A formal quality assessment of the included studies was carried out by using the AMSTAR 2. We also provided a hierarchical stratification of the evidence from meta-analyses based on the class of evidence. RESULTS: A total of 23 articles (13 MA, 4 NMA and 6 SR) were included for review. As compared with placebo, an increase in triglyceride levels was associated with olanzapine (medianD [95% CI]: 37 [12.27, 61.74] mg/dL; MD [95% CI]: 38.57 [21.44, 55.77] mg/dL) and quetiapine (medianD [95% CI]: 21.58 [95% CI]: 4.27, 38.31 mg/dL; MD [95% CI]: 34.87 [20.08, 49.67] mg/dL; SMD [95% CI]: 0.37 [0.06, 0.068]), whereas decreased triglyceride levels were found for lurasidone. Increased total cholesterol level was associated with asenapine (medianD [95% CI]: 9.1 [1.73, 16.44] mg/dL), quetiapine (medianD [95% CI]: 15.60 [7.30, 24.05] mg/dL; olanzapine (MD [95% CI] from 3.67 [1.43, 5.92] mg/dL to 20.47 [13.97, 26.94] mg/dL]; and lurasidone (medianD [95% CI]: 8.94 [1.27, 16.90] mg/dL). Change in glucose levels did not differ among antipsychotics or placebo. Lurasidone, molindone, and ziprasidone were the best tolerated in terms of weight gain. According to the AMSTAR 2 scoring system, 13 (56.5%) reviews were rated as very low quality. According to classes of evidence, most MA were level 4, especially because of their limited total sample size. CONCLUSION: By collating meta-analyses assessing biochemical markers of metabolic syndrome in antipsychotic-treated children, we conclude that olanzapine should not be the antipsychotic of choice in patients at risk for hypertriglyceridemia or hypercholesterolemia. Aripiprazole and lurasidone appear to be better tolerated in terms of metabolic adverse events. Insufficient meta-analytic data are available to provide a precise risk estimate of metabolic syndrome, and, overall, the quality of evidence is low. STUDY REGISTRATION INFORMATION: Association between the use of antipsychotic drugs and alterations of the parameters defining the Metabolic Syndrome (MetS) in children and adolescents: an umbrella review; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; CRD42021252336.

A multicenter phase II trial of the triplet antiemetic therapy with palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine for a cisplatin-containing regimen. - PATROL-I.

Dexamethasone is one of the key antiemetic agents and is widely used even now. However, dexamethasone has been associated with several adverse reactions even after short-term administration. Therefore, developing a steroid-free antiemetic regimen is an important issue to consider. Thus, the purpose of this study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of palonosetron, aprepitant, and olanzapine in a multi-institutional phase II study. Chemotherapy-naive patients scheduled to receive cisplatin were enrolled and evaluated for the occurrence of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting during 120 h after chemotherapy. The primary endpoint of the study was total control (TC) in the overall phase. The key secondary endpoint was complete response (CR), which was assessed in the acute, delayed, and overall phase, respectively. Adverse events were evaluated according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. Eighty-five patients were enrolled from 8 centers in Japan, of which 83 were evaluable for analyses. The percentage of patients who achieved TC during the overall phase was 31.3%. CR was achieved in 61.4%, 84.3%, and 65.1% of patients during the overall, acute, and delayed phases, respectively. The most frequently reported adverse event was anorexia. The primary endpoint was below the threshold and we could not find benefit in the dexamethasone-free regimen, but CR during the overall phase was similar to that of the conventional three-drug regimen. This antiemetic regimen without dexamethasone might be an option for patients for whom corticosteroids should not be an active application.

Update Lessons from Positron Emission Tomography Imaging Part I: A Systematic Critical Review on Therapeutic Plasma Concentrations of Antipsychotics.

BACKGROUND: Positron emission tomography (PET) and single photon emission tomography (SPECT) of molecular drug targets (neuroreceptors and transporters) provide essential information for therapeutic drug monitoring-guided antipsychotic drug therapy. The optimal therapeutic windows for D 2 antagonists and partial agonists, as well as their proposed target ranges, are discussed based on an up-to-date literature search. METHODS: This part I of II presents an overview of molecular neuroimaging studies in humans and primates involving the target engagement of amisulpride, haloperidol, clozapine, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, cariprazine, and ziprasidone. The systemic review particularly focused on dopamine D 2 -like and 5-HT 2A receptors. Target concentration ranges were estimated based on receptor occupancy ranges that relate to clinical effects or side effects (ie, extrapyramidal side effects). In addition, findings for other relevant receptor systems were included to further enrich the discussion. RESULTS: The reported reference ranges for aripiprazole and clozapine align closely with findings from PET studies. Conversely, for haloperidol, risperidone, and olanzapine, the PET studies indicate that a lowering of the previously published upper limits would be necessary to decrease the risk of extrapyramidal side effect. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular neuroimaging studies serve as a strong tool for defining target ranges for antipsychotic drug treatment and directing therapeutic drug monitoring.

The effect of vortioxetine on anhedonia in patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Anhedonia is a common symptom of depression, but is also a negative symptom of schizophrenia. The purpose of this study was to examine the effects of vortioxetine on anhedonia in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: A total of 120 patients with schizophrenia in remission who met inclusion criteria were randomized 1:1 by the envelope method into intervention and control groups. All participants in both groups were divided into three subgroups based on the antipsychotic therapy they were receiving (olanzapine, risperidone, or aripiprazole). Vortioxetine was administered to those in the intervention group at a fixed dose of 10 mg per day. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), and Chapman Scale for Social and Physical Anhedonia (CSPA) were administered. The study lasted 12 weeks. Participants were assessed twice: At baseline and at the end of the study. Six participants dropped out, with 114 completing the trial. FINDINGS: Vortioxetine treatment had a significant effect on level of physical anhedonia. The treatment interaction was also statistically significant, but with a relatively small effect (F = 3.17, P < .05; η2 = .061). Vortioxetine treatment had a particularly strong effect on the level of social anhedonia. The interaction between the treatment and the type of antipsychotics was also statistically significant with a small effect (F = 5.04, P < 0. 01; η2 = .091). CONCLUSION: The combination of olanzapine and vortioxetine was found to be the best option to reduce symptoms of social and physical anhedonia in these patients with remitted schizophrenia.

Dexamethasone-sparing on days 2-4 with combined palonosetron, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist, and olanzapine in cisplatin: a randomized phase III trial (SPARED Trial).

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated the non-inferiority of dexamethasone (DEX) on day 1, with sparing on days 2-4 in cisplatin-based chemotherapy. METHODS: Patients with malignant solid tumors who were treated with cisplatin (≥50 mg/m²) were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either DEX on days 1-4 (Arm D4) or DEX on day 1 (Arm D1) plus palonosetron, NK-1 RA, and olanzapine (5 mg). The primary endpoint was complete response (CR) during the delayed (24-120 h) phase. The non-inferiority margin was set at -15%. RESULTS: A total of 281 patients were enrolled, 278 of whom were randomly assigned to Arm D4 (n = 139) or Arm D1 (n = 139). In 274 patients were included in the efficacy analysis, the rates of delayed CR in Arms D4 and D1 were 79.7% and 75.0%, respectively (risk difference -4.1%; 95% CI -14.1%-6.0%, P = 0.023). However, patients in Arm D1 had significantly lower total control rates during the delayed and overall phases, and more frequent nausea and appetite loss. There were no significant between-arm differences in the quality of life. CONCLUSION: DEX-sparing is an alternative option for patients receiving cisplatin; however, this revised administration schedule should be applied on an individual basis after a comprehensive evaluation. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY NUMBER: UMIN000032269.

Long-Acting Injectable Second-Generation Antipsychotics vs Placebo and Their Oral Formulations in Acute Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized-Controlled-Trials.

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS: Long-acting injectable antipsychotic drugs (LAIs) are mainly used for relapse prevention but could also be advantageous for acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled-trials (RCTs) comparing the second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (SGA-LAIs) olanzapine, risperidone, paliperidone, and aripiprazole with placebo or their oral counterparts in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. We analyzed 23 efficacy and tolerability outcomes, with the primary outcome being overall symptoms of schizophrenia. The results were obtained through random effects, pairwise meta-analyses, and subgroup tests. The study quality was assessed using the Cochrane-Risk-of-Bias-Tool version-1. STUDY RESULTS: Sixty-six studies with 16 457 participants were included in the analysis. Eleven studies compared second-generation long-acting injectable antipsychotics (SGA-LAIs) with a placebo, 54 compared second-generation oral antipsychotics (SGA-orals) with a placebo, and one compared an SGA-LAI (aripiprazole) with its oral formulation. All 4 SGA-LAIs reduced overall symptoms more than placebo, with mean standardized differences of -0.66 (95% CI: -0.90; -0.43) for olanzapine, -0.64 (-0.80; -0.48) for aripiprazole, -0.62 (-0.76; -0.48) for risperidone and -0.42 (-0.53; -0.31) for paliperidone. The side-effect profiles of the LAIs corresponded to the patterns known from the oral formulations. In subgroup tests compared to placebo, some side effects were less pronounced under LAIs than under their oral formulations. CONCLUSIONS: SGA-LAIs effectively treat acute schizophrenia. Some side effects may be less frequent than under oral drugs, but due to the indirect nature of the comparisons, this finding must be confirmed by RCTs comparing LAIs and orals head-to-head.

A naturalistic effectiveness study of maintenance therapies for the bipolar disorders.

BACKGROUND: Treatment decision-making for individuals with bipolar disorder can be difficult. Recommendations from clinical practice guidelines can be affected by multiple methodological limitations, while pharmaco-epidemiological data suggest great variety in prescription practices across regions. Given these inconsistencies, this study aimed to provide an alternative perspective on the effectiveness of common bipolar disorder maintenance treatments through considering naturalistic data. METHODS: A total of 246 individuals with bipolar disorder (84 bipolar I [BP-I], 162 bipolar II [BP-II]) were recruited through clinics and/or websites. All were euthymic and had trialled at least one mood stabiliser. They completed an online survey containing questions on demographics, clinical variables, symptomatology, and the effectiveness/side effect profiles of any mood stabilisers (MSTs) or atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) that they have taken. RESULTS: Lithium and lamotrigine were the most commonly prescribed MSTs and the most effective at mood stabilisation. Lithium and lamotrigine appeared marginally more effective for BP-I and BP-II respectively, however, only the latter difference was statistically significant. Furthermore, lamotrigine had the more favourable side effect profile. Amongst the AAPs, quetiapine and olanzapine were the most commonly prescribed, but they were negligibly superior to other AAPs. CONCLUSION: This study clearly established a preference for lamotrigine in the maintenance treatment of BP-II. While the literature consistently emphasises the primacy of lithium in bipolar disorder treatment, its side effect profile as observed in this study remains a concern. Future research considering moderators of treatment response and concomitant medications could help to identify further nuances to consider for treatment decision-making.