Association of C-reactive protein and metabolic risk with cognitive effects of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence has implicated insulin resistance and inflammation in the pathophysiology of cognitive impairments associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. This post-hoc analysis based on a placebo-controlled trial investigated the effect of inflammation (indexed by CRP) and metabolic risk factors on cognitive performance in patients with schizophrenia treated with lurasidone. METHODS: Acutely exacerbated patients with schizophrenia were randomized to lurasidone (80 or 160 mg/day), quetiapine XR 600 mg/day, or placebo. A wide range CRP test and a cognitive assessment using the CogState computerized battery were performed at baseline and week 6 study endpoint. Associations between log-transformed CRP, high density lipoprotein (HDL), homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) and treatment response were evaluated. RESULTS: CRP combined with HDL, triglyceride-to-HDL (TG/HDL) ratio, or HOMA-IR at study baseline were significant moderators of the improvement in cognitive performance associated with lurasidone 160 mg/day (vs. placebo) treatment (p < .05). Greater placebo-corrected treatment effect size on the CogState composite score was observed for patients in the lurasidone 160 mg/day treatment group who had either low CRP and high HDL (d = 0.43), or low CRP and low HOMA-IR (d = 0.46). Interactive relationships between CRP, HDL, TG/HDL, HOMA-IR and the antipsychotic efficacy of lurasidone or quetiapine XR were not significant. There were no significant associations between antipsychotic treatment and changes in CRP level at study endpoint. CONCLUSIONS: Findings of this post-hoc analysis based on a placebo-controlled trial in patients with schizophrenia suggest that baseline CRP level combined with measures of metabolic risk significantly moderated the improvement in cognitive performance associated with lurasidone 160 mg/day (vs. placebo) treatment. Our findings underscore the importance of maintaining a low metabolic risk profile in patients with schizophrenia.

Daytime sleepiness associated with lurasidone and quetiapine XR: results from a randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to compare the effects of 2 atypical antipsychotic agents, lurasidone (80 mg/d or 160 mg/d) and quetiapine XR (600 mg/d), on daytime alertness, and to evaluate the effects of daytime sleepiness on treatment outcomes in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. METHODS: Patients who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, text revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for schizophrenia were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with fixed doses of lurasidone 80 mg/d (n = 125), lurasidone 160 mg/d (n = 121), quetiapine XR 600 mg/d (n = 119), or placebo (n = 121), all dosed once daily in the evening, with food. Daytime sleepiness was assessed using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). RESULTS: Daytime sleepiness improved in the lurasidone and placebo-treated groups but worsened in the quetiapine XR treatment group when compared to placebo (p = 0.001) and to either dose of lurasidone (both p < 0.01). Sedation associated with quetiapine XR treatment mediated an improvement in agitation [assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excitement (PANSS-EC) subscale] and a worsening in functional capacity [assessed by the University of California-San Diego (UCSD) Performance-Based Skills Assessment-Brief Version (UPSA-B) total score]; these mediating relationships were not observed for the lurasidone or placebo treatment groups. CONCLUSION: In this 6-week double-blind study, treatment with lurasidone 80 mg or 160 mg, administered once daily in the evening, was associated with a reduction in daytime sleepiness similar in magnitude to placebo, while quetiapine XR 600 mg/d was associated with a significant increase in daytime sleepiness, compared to both lurasidone dose groups and placebo. Daytime sleepiness was associated with improvement in agitation and worsening in functional capacity for quetiapine XR, but not lurasidone or placebo-treated patients.

Metabolic risk factors in first-episode schizophrenia: baseline prevalence and course analysed from the European First-Episode Schizophrenia Trial.

Available data on antipsychotic-induced metabolic risks are often constrained by potential confounding effects due to prior antipsychotic treatment. In this study, we assessed the baseline prevalence of metabolic abnormalities and changes following treatment with five commonly-used antipsychotic drugs (haloperidol, amisulpride, olanzapine, quetiapine or ziprasidone) in first-episode, partially antipsychotic-naive patients with schizophrenia in the European first-episode schizophrenia trial (EUFEST). Overall baseline prevalence of metabolic syndrome (MetS) was 6.0%, with similar rates observed in the antipsychotic-naive patients (5.7%, 9/157) and in the other patients with only a brief prior exposure to antipsychotics (6.1%, 20/326). These results are consistent with the MetS prevalence rate estimated in a general population of similar age. Examination of individual risk factors showed 58.5% of subjects had one or more elevated metabolic risks at baseline: 28.5% demonstrated suboptimal HDL; 24.2% hypertension; 17.7% hypertriglyceridemia; 8.2% abdominal obesity; 7.3% hyperglycaemia. Increase in body weight (kg/month) occurred in patients treated with haloperidol (0.62 S.E. 0.11), amisulpride (0.76 S.E. 0.08), olanzapine (0.98 S.E. 0.07) and quetiapine (0.58 S.E. 0.09), which was significantly greater than that in the ziprasidone group (0.18 S.E. 0.10). The incidence rate of new diabetes cases over a 52-wk follow-up period was 0.82% (4/488). More patients experienced worsening rather than improvement of hypertriglyceridemia or hyperglycaemia in all treatment groups. Our findings suggest that in first-episode, partially antipsychotic-naive patients, the baseline prevalence rate of MetS appears to be no higher than that in the general population, but serious underlying individual risk factors nevertheless existed.

A post hoc analysis of negative symptoms and psychosocial function in patients with schizophrenia: a 40-week randomized, double-blind study of ziprasidone versus haloperidol followed by a 3-year double-blind extension trial.

Schizophrenia is a persistent, lifelong illness such that enduring functional improvements may only occur over the course of years [corrected].This post hoc analysis in stable outpatients with schizophrenia investigated the negative symptom efficacy and treatment outcomes of ziprasidone (80-160 mg/d given twice a day, mean modal dose of 112 mg/d; and 80-120 mg/d given every day, mean modal dose of 96 mg/d) versus haloperidol (5-20 mg/d, mean modal dose of 12 mg/d) in a randomized, 40-week, double-blind study, followed by a double-blind continuation trial that extended up to 156 additional weeks. Symptomatic and functional recovery criteria were met when subjects attained both negative symptom remission and adequate psychosocial functioning based on the 4 Quality-of-Life subscales (instrumental role, interpersonal relations, participation in community, and intrapsychic foundations). Negative symptom remission (P = 0.005), as well as sustained adequate functioning (6 months) in instrumental role (P = 0.04) and participation in community (P = 0.02), was associated with significantly shorter time to remission in the ziprasidone 80 to 160 mg group than in the haloperidol group, as was the combination of symptomatic and functional recovery during the 196-week double-blind study period. A similar pattern was observed for the ziprasidone 80 to 120 mg group, which showed significant differences versus haloperidol in negative symptom remission and instrumental role functioning (but not other Quality-of-Life subscale measures). The clinically relevant outcome differences detected in this post hoc exploratory analysis support the potential for both enhanced remission in negative symptoms and psychosocial recovery during long-term treatment with an atypical agent and add to our understanding regarding the degree to which negative symptom remission can be attained in the maintenance phase.

Remission in schizophrenia: 196-week, double-blind treatment with ziprasidone vs. haloperidol.

To compare the remission rate and its time-course over 196 wk of double-blind treatment with an atypical antipsychotic, ziprasidone (80-160 mg/d given b.i.d., or 80-120 mg/d given q.d.), or a conventional antipsychotic, haloperidol (5-20 mg/d). Outcome assessments included attainment of remission (Andreasen criteria) by longitudinal analysis. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores, Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF) scores, and quality-of-life (QLS) were also assessed in the initial 40-wk study phase (n=599) and the 3-yr extension study (n=186). Discontinuation rates in the initial 40-wk core and follow-up extension studies were comparable between groups: 64% and 65% for the 80-160 mg/d ziprasidone group, 65% and 58% for the 80-120 mg/d ziprasidone group, and 60% and 66% for the 5-20 mg/d haloperidol group, respectively. Mean change scores from baseline to LOCF endpoint (week 40 or early termination) for PANSS negative and GAF (primary efficacy variables) were not statistically significantly different between ziprasidone and haloperidol. During the 3-yr extension study, ziprasidone-treated subjects (80-160 mg/d) were more likely to achieve remission (51%) than haloperidol-treated (40%) subjects (p=0.04), while there was a favourable trend associated with 80-120 mg/d ziprasidone (48%). Compared to the haloperidol group, subjects assigned to the 80-160 mg/d ziprasidone group showed a gradual and persistent improvement in remission (p=0.006) and quality-of-life (p=0.004) in the longitudinal analyses. Significant differences in the trajectory of PANSS total and GAF scores favouring the 80-160 mg/d ziprasidone group were also observed. In this long-term, double-blind study, ziprasidone treatment was more likely to result in remission than haloperidol treatment, and was associated with greater improvement in quality-of-life.

Understanding the relationship between baseline BMI and subsequent weight change in antipsychotic trials: effect modification or regression to the mean?

The purpose of this study was to examine whether prior evidence of an inverse relationship between initial body weight and subsequent antipsychotic-induced weight change represents true effect modification or a statistical artifact, regression to the mean (RTM). We conducted a post-hoc analysis after pooling seven randomized, placebo- or active-controlled trials of ziprasidone and other antipsychotic agents. ANCOVA was applied to evaluate treatment-by-baseline body mass index (BMI) range interaction effect on weight change. Regression analysis was applied to estimate the potential bias due to RTM. Statistical interaction tests between baseline BMI ranges and treatment assignments (haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, or ziprasidone, versus placebo) were not significant within studies or across studies. Correlation between baseline and follow-up measurements of body weight in placebo-treated subjects was less than perfect (r=0.87, 6-month cohort), leading to RTM. Consistent with predictions based on RTM, the greatest weight change, on average, was observed in subgroups with baseline weights differing the most from the population mean. Our findings suggest that the previously observed correlation between baseline BMI and weight change subsequent to antipsychotic treatment reflects in part RTM, and not effect modification. This class of drugs appears to cause similar weight gain in both high and low baseline BMI groups.

Neglecting regression to the mean continues to lead to unwarranted conclusions: Letter regarding "The magnitude of weight loss induced by metformin is independently associated with BMI at baseline in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: Post-hoc analysis from data of a phase IV open-labeled trial".

As the prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity increases worldwide, scientifically rigorous research is needed in this field to determine effective interventions for the prevention and treatment of these chronic diseases. In a recent study published in this journal, Zhou et al. conclude that metformin, a drug used for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, can be used effectively for weight loss, and that this effect is even more pronounced in individuals who weigh more at baseline. Unfortunately, we believe these results to be due to the regression to the mean (RTM) phenomenon, which weakens the causal inference proposed in this study. The conclusions of Zhou et al. that metformin is an effective strategy for weight loss in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus are not substantiated due to the lack of a control group and failure to consider other factors that may have confounded these results.

Associations of the serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) with bipolar disorder and treatment response: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Associations of the serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) with bipolar disorder (BPD) and treatment response in bipolar patients were not conclusive. This study not only assessed the association between the 5-HTTLPR and BPD with accumulating relevant studies, but also in the first time evaluated the effect of the 5-HTTLPR on both anti-depressive and anti-manic treatment responses in bipolar patients. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, Cochrane Library and Cochrane Control Trials databases were systematically searched before February 2017. This meta-analysis followed the PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: A total of 32 population-based studies (5567 cases and 6993 controls) and 9 family-based studies (837 trios) were finally screened out and statistically joined into a single meta-analysis that revealed an association between S allele and an increased risk of BPD (OR = 1.06, p = .038). Pooled analysis of the 32 population-based studies indicated an association of S-carrier genotypes with an increased risk of BPD (OR = 1.10, p = .029). Meanwhile, the association remained significant in Caucasians (OR = 1.15, p = .004), which could provide an enough power (88%) to detect a significant association. Regarding the treatment response studies, 6 studies reporting the relationship of the 5-HTTLPR in anti-depressive remission rate (1034 patients) and 7 studies reporting in response rate (1098 patients) were included for pooled analyses. We observed a significant association of S-carrier genotypes with a reduced anti-depressive remission rate (OR = 0.64, p = .006) but not with anti-depressive response rate. The association between the 5-HTTLPR with anti-manic response rate was not observed in the included 6 studies (676 patients). CONCLUSIONS: The present study supported the presence of a marginal but detectable effect of the 5-HTTLPR on susceptibility to BPD. Moreover, the detected association in Caucasian was statistically reliable. Besides, the 5-HTTLPR was identified as a useful predictor for anti-depressive remission but not for anti-depressive or anti-manic response.

Associations of Homer Scaffolding Protein 1 gene and psychological correlates with suicide attempts in Chinese: A pilot study of multifactorial risk model.

BACKGROUND: Suicide is a fatal outcome for subjects with mental ill-health. Genetic factors and psychological correlates are believed to contribute to the risk of suicide attempts (SA), whereas both factors are reported to exert a small effect. This study therefore tried to investigate if combination of the two aspects can enhance the explanation of variance in SA. METHODS: A common variant rs7713917 in HOMER1 gene was genotyped for 333 Chinese psychiatric patients with or without SA. Multifactorial risk models comprised of this variant and psychological correlates were identified by logistic regression analysis (LRA) and Multifactor Dimensionality Reduction (MDR) method separately, and then evaluated for their performance by biostatistical methods. RESULTS: An association of A-carrier genotypes in rs7713917 with an increased risk of SA was observed (OR = 1.79, 95% CI = 1.08-2.98). Although with a medium effect size, this variant alone could only explain 1.9% variance of SA. Interestingly, this study was the first time to show that the association of the rs7713917 and SA was significantly mediated by the NEO conscientiousness (NEOC) dimension (p-value = 0.002), with a greater genetic effect observed in subjects with a low NEO-C level (OR = 2.89, 95% CI = 1.16-7.18) but not in subjects with an average or high level. Upon the LRA method, the multifactorial risk model constituted of the two interacted factors and their interaction effect could explain up to 17.0% variance, which was almost 9-fold higher than the one explained by the rs7713917 alone. Furthermore, this model owned a higher effectiveness than the three models identified by the MDR method (p-value < 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: The present study identified an effective multifactorial risk model, in which the combination of the HOMER1 variant and the NEO-C dimension could enhance explanation of the variance of SA in Chinese. This pilot study may provide a novel avenue to investigate the pathogenesis of SA in psychiatric patients.

Insight and Treatment Outcomes in Schizophrenia: Post-hoc Analysis of a Long-term, Double-blind Study Comparing Lurasidone and Quetiapine XR.

Objective: The objective of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the effect of lurasidone and quetiapine extended-release (XR) on insight and judgment and assess the longitudinal relationships between improvement in insight and cognitive performance, functional capacity, quality of well-being, and depressive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. Design: Clinically unstable patients with schizophrenia (N=488) were randomized to once-daily, fixed-dose treatment with lurasidone 80mg, lurasidone 160mg, quetiapine XR 600mg, or placebo, followed by a long-term, double-blind, flexible-dose continuation study involving these agents. Results: Significantly greater improvement in insight and judgment (assessed by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale G12 item) for the lurasidone and quetiapine XR groups, compared to the placebo group, was observed at Week 6. Over a subsequent six-month continuation period, the flexible dose lurasidone group showed significantly greater improvement in insight from acute phase baseline compared to the flexible-dose quetiapine XR group (QXR-QXR) (p=0.032). Improvement in insight was significantly correlated with improvement in cognition (p=0.014), functional capacity (p=0.006, UPSA-B), quality of well-being (p=0.033, QWB), and depressive symptoms (p=0.05, Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] score) across treatment groups and study periods. Conclusion: In this post-hoc analysis, flexibly dosed lurasidone 40 to 160mg/d was found to be associated with significantly greater improvement in insight compared to flexibly dosed quetiapine XR 200 to 800mg/d over long-term treatment in patients with schizophrenia. Across treatment groups, improvement in insight and judgment was significantly associated with improvement in cognition, functional capacity, quality of well-being, and depressive symptoms over time.

Treatment-Resistant Schizophrenia: Treatment Response and Resistance in Psychosis (TRRIP) Working Group Consensus Guidelines on Diagnosis and Terminology.

OBJECTIVE: Research and clinical translation in schizophrenia is limited by inconsistent definitions of treatment resistance and response. To address this issue, the authors evaluated current approaches and then developed consensus criteria and guidelines. METHOD: A systematic review of randomized antipsychotic clinical trials in treatment-resistant schizophrenia was performed, and definitions of treatment resistance were extracted. Subsequently, consensus operationalized criteria were developed through 1) a multiphase, mixed methods approach, 2) identification of key criteria via an online survey, and 3) meetings to achieve consensus. RESULTS: Of 2,808 studies identified, 42 met inclusion criteria. Of these, 21 studies (50%) did not provide operationalized criteria. In the remaining studies, criteria varied considerably, particularly regarding symptom severity, prior treatment duration, and antipsychotic dosage thresholds; only two studies (5%) utilized the same criteria. The consensus group identified minimum and optimal criteria, employing the following principles: 1) current symptoms of a minimum duration and severity determined by a standardized rating scale; 2) moderate or worse functional impairment; 3) prior treatment consisting of at least two different antipsychotic trials, each for a minimum duration and dosage; 4) systematic monitoring of adherence and meeting of minimum adherence criteria; 5) ideally at least one prospective treatment trial; and 6) criteria that clearly separate responsive from treatment-resistant patients. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in current approaches to defining treatment resistance in schizophrenia. The authors present consensus guidelines that operationalize criteria for determining and reporting treatment resistance, adequate treatment, and treatment response, providing a benchmark for research and clinical translation.

Change in daytime sleepiness and cognitive function in a 6-month, double-blind study of lurasidone and quetiapine XR in patients with schizophrenia.

Daytime sleepiness is a commonly reported adverse effect associated with psychotropic agents that may impair cognitive performance and functioning. The objective of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the long-term effects of lurasidone and quetiapine XR on daytime sleepiness and neurocognitive performance during a 6-month, double-blind continuation study, in subjects who completed an initial 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing these agents. Daytime sleepiness, cognitive performance, and health-related quality of life were assessed with the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), CogState computerized battery, and the Quality of Well-Being (QWB-SA) Scale, respectively. Treatment with flexible-dose lurasidone 40-160 mg/d, administered once daily in the evening, was associated with significantly reduced daytime sleepiness compared with flexibly dosed quetiapine XR 200-800 mg/d (p = 0.03, effect size = 0.36) at week 32 (month 6 of the continuation study endpoint). Incidence of markedly high sleepiness (ESS > 10) was significantly higher in the quetiapine XR (200-800 mg/d) group compared with the lurasidone (40-160 mg/day) group at both months 3 and 6 visits (p < 0.05). Lurasidone (40-160 mg/d) significantly improved neurocognitive performance compared to quetiapine XR (200-800 mg/d) before (effect size = 0.49) and after adjustment (effect size = 0.45) for sleepiness effect (p = 0.008 and 0.010, respectively). Increased daytime sleepiness was significantly associated with reduced neurocognitive performance (p = 0.019) and quality of well-being (p = 0.05). Our findings suggest that clinicians should actively monitor patients for the presence of daytime sleepiness due in part to its potential impact on neurocognitive performance and well-being.

Six-month, blinded, multicenter continuation study of ziprasidone versus olanzapine in schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: The authors' goal was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of 6 months' treatment with flexible-dose ziprasidone and olanzapine in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) severity scores were obtained for 126 responders to a 6-week acute study of olanzapine and ziprasidone during a blinded 6-month continuation study and optional extension study. RESULTS: Comparable improvements in BPRS and CGI severity scores were seen with both drugs. Olanzapine produced significant increases from acute-study baseline values in weight and body mass index and within-group increases in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and fasting insulin. Between-group differences were not significant for lipids and insulin. Mean QTc values at endpoint were 407.1 msec (baseline mean=406.0 msec) and 394.4 msec (baseline mean=399.7 msec) for ziprasidone and olanzapine, respectively. No patient had a QTc interval > or =500 msec. CONCLUSIONS: Ziprasidone and olanzapine had comparable long-term efficacy; olanzapine was associated with significant weight gain and metabolic alterations.

Ziprasidone and haloperidol in the treatment of acute exacerbation of schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder: comparison of intramuscular and oral formulations in a 6-week, randomized, blinded-assessment study.

RATIONALE: Conventional intramuscular (IM) antipsychotics used in managing acute exacerbation of schizophrenia are associated with side effects such as acute dystonia. OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of sequential IM/oral ziprasidone with haloperidol in acute exacerbation of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: In a 6-week, multicenter, parallel-group, flexibly dosed study, patients were randomized to ziprasidone (IM up to 3 days, then oral 40-80 mg, b.i.d.) or haloperidol (IM up to 3 days, then oral 5-20 mg/day). Assessments were rater-blinded. RESULTS: At the end of IM treatment, patients receiving ziprasidone (n=427) showed significantly improved Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale Total (BPRS total) scores compared with those receiving haloperidol (n=138) [least-squares (LS) mean change -6.14 for ziprasidone versus -4.13 for haloperidol, P<0.0018]. At endpoint, there were no significant between-group differences in BPRS total scores. There was a significantly greater improvement in BPRS negative subscale scores in ziprasidone-treated patients, both at the end of IM treatment (LS mean change -1.15 for ziprasidone and -0.28 for haloperidol, P<0.0001) and at study endpoint (LS mean change -2.94 for ziprasidone and -2.24 for haloperidol, P<0.0001). Haloperidol-treated patients exhibited significantly greater increases in Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale at end of IM treatment and at endpoint (P<0.0001). They also had significantly higher ratings on the Barnes Akathisia Scale (P<0.0001) and the Movement Disorder Burden Score (P<0.005), as well as higher incidences of movement disorder-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Sequential IM and oral ziprasidone offers important efficacy and tolerability advantages over haloperidol in acute schizophrenia.

Effect of lurasidone dose on cognition in patients with schizophrenia: post-hoc analysis of a long-term, double-blind continuation study.

We previously reported that treatment with 160mg/d of lurasidone improved cognitive performance in a manner superior to placebo, quetiapine XR 600mg/d, and lurasidone 80mg/d, based on a 6-week randomized trial of patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. The objective of this post-hoc analysis was to explore the cognitive and functional performance of patients whose final doses of lurasidone were 40/80mg/d, 120mg/d, and 160mg/d compared to quetiapine XR 200-800mg/d (QXR) during a 6-month, double-blind continuation study that followed a short-term trial. Subjects who received final doses of lurasidone 120mg/d (n=77) and 160mg/d (n=49) showed significantly greater improvement in overall cognitive performance compared to QXR (n=85) at week 32 (month 6 of the extension study), while those on last doses of 40/80mg/d (n=25) showed a trend towards significance at week 32. Mean changes in neurocognitive composite z-score from pre-treatment baseline were significant for the 3 lurasidone final dose groups at both weeks 19 and 32, with composite change scores of z=1.53, z=1.43, and z=1.34 for the lurasidone 40/80mg/d, 120mg/d, and 160mg/d, respectively, at week 32. In contrast, the composite change score was not statistically significant in the overall quetiapine group (z=0.46), with none of the individual quetiapine doses showing any significant improvement. Functional capacity scores improved in all treatment groups. Our findings indicate improved cognitive performance in patients treated with each of the flexible doses of lurasidone 40-160mg/d, compared to quetiapine XR 200-800mg/d. All doses of lurasidone were superior to all doses of quetiapine for cognitive performance.

Insight and subjective measures of quality of life in chronic schizophrenia.

Lack of insight is a well-established phenomenon in schizophrenia, and has been associated with reduced rater-assessed functional performance but increased self-reported well-being in previous studies. The objective of this study was to examine factors that might influence insight (as assessed by the Insight and Treatment Attitudes Questionnaire [ITAQ] or PANSS item G12) and subjective quality-of-life (as assessed by Lehman QoL Interview [LQOLI]), using the large National Institute of Mental Health Clinical Antipsychotic Trials of Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) dataset. Uncooperativeness was assessed by PANSS item G8 ("Uncooperativeness"). In the analysis, we found significant moderating effects for insight on the relationships of subjective life satisfaction assessment to symptom severity (as assessed by CGI-S score), objective everyday functioning (as assessed by rater-administered Heinrichs-Carpenter Quality of Life scale), clinically rated uncooperativeness (as assessed by PANSS G8), and discontinuation of treatment for all causes (all P > 0.05 for statistical interaction between insight and subject QoL). Patients with chronic schizophrenia who reported being "pleased" or "delighted" on LQOLI were found to have significantly lower neurocognitive reasoning performance and poorer insight (ITAQ total score). Our findings underscore the importance of reducing cognitive and insight impairments for both treatment compliance and improved functional outcomes.

Randomized, controlled, double-blind multicenter comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone and olanzapine in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Limited randomized, controlled trial data exist on possible differences between atypical antipsychotics in efficacy, overall tolerability, and important indices of health status. The authors compared the efficacy and tolerability of ziprasidone and olanzapine in the treatment of acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHOD: In this 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-design, flexible-dose trial, patients were randomly assigned to receive ziprasidone (N=136) or olanzapine (N=133). Primary efficacy measures were improvement in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) severity scale scores; secondary measures were scores on the CGI improvement scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia. Tolerability assessments included fasting lipid profiles, fasting glucose and insulin measurements, electrocardiography, and monitoring of vital signs and body weight. RESULTS: The overall mean daily doses were 129.9 mg (SD=27.3) for ziprasidone and 11.3 mg (SD=2.8) for olanzapine. Both antipsychotics were efficacious in improving symptoms and global illness severity. The two treatment groups did not differ significantly in primary or secondary efficacy measures at endpoint or in by-visit analysis. Both agents were well tolerated. Body weight, total cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol significantly increased with olanzapine but not with ziprasidone; all between-group comparisons of these variables were significant and favored ziprasidone. Olanzapine, but not ziprasidone, was associated with significant increases in fasting insulin level. No patient in either group exhibited a corrected QT interval >/=500 msec. CONCLUSIONS: During 6 weeks' treatment, ziprasidone and olanzapine demonstrated comparable antipsychotic efficacy. Differences favoring ziprasidone were observed in metabolic parameters.

Randomized, controlled, double-blind, multicenter comparison of the cognitive effects of ziprasidone versus olanzapine in acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

BACKGROUND: Newer antipsychotic medications have been reported to enhance cognitive functioning in schizophrenia. Head to head studies with double-blind methods are still relatively few in number. OBJECTIVES: To compare the relative cognitive enhancing effects of ziprasidone and olanzapine in the treatment of acutely ill inpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. PROCEDURES: In this 6-week, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-designed trial, patients were randomized to ziprasidone or olanzapine. No patient who had ever received a complete treatment trial with either of these medications previously was entered into the study. Cognitive testing measuring attention, motor speed, memory, executive functioning, and verbal skills were performed on all patients at baseline and endpoint. RESULTS: Treatment with either ziprasidone or olanzapine was associated with statistically significant improvements from baseline in attention, memory, working memory, motor speed, and executive functions. Treatment with olanzapine was also associated with a statistically significant improvement in verbal fluency. No statistically significant differences between these medications were found in the magnitude of improvement from baseline on any of the cognitive measures (other than verbal fluency in an exploratory analysis). Observed changes were not associated with changes in clinical symptoms measured using the PANSS or changes in movement disorders. CONCLUSIONS: During 6 weeks of treatment, ziprasidone and olanzapine demonstrated substantial and comparable cognitive-enhancing effects relative to previous treatment. These effects were noted in all aspects of cognitive functioning previously proven to predict functional outcome in schizophrenia. No overall differences were detected between the medications in terms of the extent of cognitive enhancement.