Long-term safety and effectiveness of open-label lurasidone in antipsychotic-Naïve versus previously treated adolescents with Schizophrenia: A post-hoc analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is a relative lack of long-term, prospective data evaluating the safety and effectiveness of treatment in early-onset adolescent patients with schizophrenia who are treatment-naïve. The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to examine the long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia who were antipsychotic treatment-naïve (TN; at the time of enrolment in the initial study) compared to adolescents treated previously (TP) with an antipsychotic. METHODS: Patients aged 13-17 who completed 6 weeks of double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone were enrolled in a 2-year, open-label (OL), flexible-dose (20-80 mg/day) lurasidone study. RESULTS: The long-term analysis sample consisted of 50 TN and 221 TP patients, of whom 40% and 43%, respectively, discontinued prematurely. The three most common adverse events for TN and TP patients, respectively, were headache (26.0%, 23.5%); schizophrenia (14.0%, 12.2%), dizziness (16.0%, 4.1%), and nausea (16.0%, 11.8%). At endpoint, mean increase in weight was similar to expected weight gain based on growth charts for both TN (+4.5 kg vs. + 5.7 kg) and TP (+4.6 kg vs. + 6.6 kg) patients. Minimal changes were observed for each group in metabolic parameters and prolactin. Mean improvement was consistently greater in the TN vs. TP group (-19.2 vs. -15.9; effect size of 0.33) for between-group change in PANSS total score at Week 104. CONCLUSIONS: In both TN and TP adolescents with schizophrenia, long-term treatment with lurasidone was associated with minimal effects on body weight, lipids, glycemic indices, and prolactin, with generally small differences noted in rates of reported AEs. Continued improvement in symptoms of schizophrenia was evident for both the TN and TP groups. These data indicate that lurasidone is a safe and efficacious treatment option for treatment-naïve youth with schizophrenia, who are generally most sensitive to antipsychotic adverse effects.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone in adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia: A pooled post hoc analysis of double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week studies.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this pooled analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia in adolescents and young adults. METHODS: The six pooled studies in this analysis used similar study designs and outcome measures. Patients (aged 13-25 years) were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment with lurasidone in fixed doses of 40, 80, 120, or 160 mg. The primary efficacy endpoint was Week 6 change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score; secondary efficacy endpoints included Week 6 change in the Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale. RESULTS: The safety population consisted of 537 patients (mean age: 18.1 years); 82.6% of patients completed the studies. Treatment with lurasidone was significantly better than placebo at all doses (p < 0.001) for change in the PANSS total score at Week 6. Placebo-adjusted PANSS scores ranged from -9.4 to -16.1 (effect sizes: 0.53-0.90), with effect sizes increasing at higher doses. For lurasidone (combined doses), three adverse events occurred with a frequency of ≥5% (nausea: 13.5%; somnolence: 12.1%; akathisia: 10.1%). At last observation carried forward (LOCF)-endpoint weight gain of ≥7% was similar for lurasidone versus placebo (3.6 vs. 4.7%). Minimal median changes were observed at endpoint in cholesterol, -2.0 mg/dL; triglycerides, 0.0 mg/dL; and glucose, 0.0 mg/dL. CONCLUSIONS: In adolescents and young adults with schizophrenia, treatment with lurasidone in doses of 40-160 mg/d was a safe, well-tolerated, and effective treatment. Short-term treatment with lurasidone was associated with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters.

Dasotraline in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder: a placebo-controlled, fixed-dose trial.

In a previous study, dasotraline demonstrated efficacy at a dose of 8 mg/day in adults with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasotraline in doses of 4 and 6 mg/day. Adults meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition criteria for ADHD were randomized to 8 weeks of double-blind, once-daily, fixed-dose treatment with dasotraline 4 mg/day, 6 mg/day, or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was changed in the ADHD Rating Scale, Version IV (ADHD RS-IV) total score. Secondary efficacy endpoints included the Clinical Global Impression, Severity (CGI-S) Scale. Least squares mean reduction at week 8 in the ADHD RS-IV HV total score was not significantly greater (vs. placebo) in the dasotraline 4 mg/day group (-15.0 vs. -13.9; n.s.; or in the dasotraline 6 mg/day group (-16.5 vs. -13.9; P = 0.074; Hochberg correction). Treatment with dasotraline 6 mg/day was significant at week 8 (uncorrected) on the ADHD RS-IV total score (P = 0.037) and the CGI-S score (P = 0.011). Treatment with the 4 mg/day dose of dasotraline was NS. Treatment with dasotraline was generally well tolerated. The results provide additional evidence that supports the potential efficacy of dasotraline, in doses of 6 mg/day, in adults with ADHD.

Long-Term Assessment of Lurasidone in Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analysis of a 12-Month, Double Blind, Active-Controlled Trial and 6-Month Open-Label Extension Study.

INTRODUCTION: A post hoc analysis of a double-blind (DB) active control trial and an open-label extension (OLE) study was conducted to evaluate the long-term effects of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: In the DB trial, patients were randomised to receive lurasidone or risperidone for 12 months. In OLE, all patients received lurasidone for an additional 6 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were evaluated. Efficacy assessments included relapse rate (DB trial only), and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, Clinical Global Impression-Severity scale, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. RESULTS: In the DB trial, patients with schizophrenia were randomised to lurasidone (n = 399) and risperidone (n = 190), of whom 129 and 84 continued into OLE, respectively. During the DB trial, incidence of TEAEs was similar for lurasidone (84.1%) and risperidone (84.2%). Lurasidone was associated with minimal changes in metabolic variables and prolactin levels, whereas risperidone was associated with clinically significant increases in prolactin and fasting glucose levels. The proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome was significantly lower in patients treated with lurasidone versus risperidone at the end of the DB trial (25.5% vs 40.4%; p = 0.0177). During OLE, patients switching from risperidone to lurasidone experienced a reduction in weight and prolactin levels; those continuing treatment with lurasidone experienced minimal changes in metabolic variables and prolactin. At the end of OLE, the proportion of patients with metabolic syndrome was no longer significantly different between groups (23.5% vs 31.5%; p = not significant). Efficacy outcomes were generally similar between groups during the DB trial, and were maintained during OLE. CONCLUSION: Lurasidone was generally well tolerated and effective in clinically stable schizophrenia patients over the long term. Lurasidone was also generally well tolerated and maintained effectiveness over 6 months in patients switching from risperidone. Patients switching from risperidone experienced improvements in metabolic parameters and prolactin levels. These findings confirm lurasidone's long-term effectiveness and favourable metabolic profile in patients with schizophrenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00641745.

Efficacy and Safety of Dasotraline in Children With ADHD: A Laboratory Classroom Study.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasotraline for treatment of ADHD in children. Method: Children (ages 6-12 years; N = 112) with ADHD were randomized, double-blind, to 14 days of once-daily evening doses of dasotraline 4 mg or placebo. ADHD symptom severity was measured at baseline and Day 15 in seven, 30-min classroom sessions using the Swanson, Kotkin, Agler, M-Flynn, and Pelham (SKAMP) and the Permanent Product Measure of Performance (PERMP) math test. Results: Significant improvement was observed for dasotraline versus placebo in the SKAMP-combined score (-3.2 vs. +2.0; p < .001; effect size = 0.85) and SKAMP and PERMP subscale scores. The three most common adverse events for dasotraline (vs. placebo) were insomnia (19.6% vs. 3.6%), headache (10.7% vs. 8.9%), and decreased appetite (10.7% vs. 3.6%). Conclusion: In this laboratory classroom study, dasotraline 4 mg was found to be an efficacious and generally well-tolerated treatment for ADHD in children aged 6 to 12 years.

Dasotraline in Children with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Six-Week, Placebo-Controlled, Fixed-Dose Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Dasotraline is a potent inhibitor of presynaptic dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake with a pharmacokinetic profile characterized by slow absorption and a long elimination half-life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasotraline in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Children aged 6-12 years with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) diagnosis of ADHD were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind once-daily treatment with dasotraline (2 or 4 mg) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the ADHD Rating Scale Version IV-Home Version (ADHD RS-IV HV) total score at week 6. RESULTS: A total of 342 patients were randomized to dasotraline or placebo (mean age 9.1 years, 66.7% male). Treatment with dasotraline was associated with significant improvement at study endpoint in the ADHD RS-IV HV total score for the 4 mg/day dose versus placebo (-17.5 vs. -11.4; p < 0.001; effect size [ES], 0.48), but not for the 2 mg/day dose (-11.8 vs. -11.4; ns; ES, 0.03). A regression analysis confirmed a significant linear dose-response relationship for dasotraline. Significant improvement for dasotraline 4 mg/day dose versus placebo was also observed across the majority of secondary efficacy endpoints, including the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity score, the Conners Parent Rating Scale-Revised scale (CPRS-R) ADHD index score, and subscale measures of hyperactivity and inattentiveness. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) were higher in the dasotraline 4 mg/day group (12.2%) compared with the 2 mg/day group (6.3%) and placebo (1.7%). The most frequent AEs associated with dasotraline were insomnia, decreased appetite, decreased weight, and irritability. Psychosis-related symptoms were reported as AEs by 7/219 patients treated with dasotraline in this study. There were no serious AEs or clinically meaningful changes in blood pressure or heart rate on dasotraline. CONCLUSION: In this placebo-controlled study, treatment with dasotraline 4 mg/day significantly improved ADHD symptoms and behaviors, including attention and hyperactivity, in children aged 6-12 years. The most frequently reported AEs observed on dasotraline included insomnia, decreased appetite, decreased weight, and irritability.

Efficacy of lurasidone in the treatment of agitation: A post hoc analysis of five short-term studies in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis evaluated the effect of lurasidone on agitation in acutely ill patients with schizophrenia. METHOD: Patient-level data were pooled from five 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of fixed-dose, once-daily, oral lurasidone (40, 80, 120, or 160 mg/d). Agitation was assessed with the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) score, utilizing a mixed model for repeated measurement analysis. RESULTS: In patients with higher levels of agitation at baseline (PANSS-EC score≥14; n=773), lurasidone was associated with significantly greater improvement in least-squares (LS) mean PANSS-EC scores versus placebo at Day 3/4 (-1.6 vs -1.0; p<0.05), Day 7 (-2.3 vs -1.6; p<0.05), and at Week 6 endpoint (-5.5 vs -3.8; p<0.001; effect size=0.43). In patients with lower agitation at baseline (PANSS-EC score<14; n=754), LS mean PANSS-EC score change was significantly greater for lurasidone compared with placebo at Day 7 (-0.8 vs -0.1; p<0. 01) through Week 6 endpoint (-1.9 vs -0.9; p<0.001; effect size=0.31). Higher doses of lurasidone were notably more effective than lower doses in patients with more severe agitation at study baseline. CONCLUSION: In this pooled analysis of 5 short-term studies, lurasidone provided early and sustained reduction in agitation, assessed using the PANSS-EC score, in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Higher doses of lurasidone were particularly effective in patients with more severe agitation at study baseline. Overall, these results suggest that lurasidone may be a useful treatment option for patients exhibiting agitation associated with acute psychotic symptoms of schizophrenia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00088634 (Study D1050196); NCT00549718 (Study D1050229), NCT00615433 (Study D1050231); NCT00790192 (Study D1050233). Study D1050006 was completed prior to the requirement to register trials.

Long-term health-related quality of life improvements among patients treated with lurasidone: results from the open-label extension of a switch trial in schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Long-term improvement of health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in schizophrenia may improve adherence and reduce relapse and rehospitalization. This analysis examines long-term changes in HRQoL among patients with schizophrenia switched to lurasidone from other antipsychotics. METHODS: Patients who completed an open-label 6-week switch study continued on lurasidone for an additional 24-weeks. HRQoL was measured using the self-reported Personal Evaluation of Transitions in Treatment (PETiT) scale and Short-Form 12 (SF-12) questionnaire. The PETiT assessed HRQoL via total and domain scores (adherence-related attitude and psychosocial functioning). The SF-12 assessed patients' mental and physical component summary scores (MCS and PCS). Mean changes from the initial baseline were calculated at extension baseline and extension endpoint using analysis of covariance models. Analyses were further stratified by prior antipsychotic medication and responder status; responders were defined as having a ≥20 % improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale during the first 6-weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The analysis included 144 patients with PETIT or SF-12 data who received ≥1 dose of lurasidone. Mean (standard deviation) PETiT total score improved significantly from 34.9 (9.3) at baseline to 39.5 (8.9) at extension baseline and 39.1 (9.0) at extension endpoint, representing improvements of 4.5 (7.9) and 5.1 (7.2) points, respectively (both p < 0.001). Significant improvements in adherence-related attitude and psychosocial functioning were observed at extension baseline and extension endpoint (all p < 0.001). Improvement in SF-12 MCS score was observed at extension baseline and endpoint, and PCS score at extension endpoint (all p < 0.01). Patients who switched from quetiapine and aripiprazole showed significant improvement of PETiT total score and adherence-related attitude at extension baseline and extension endpoint. In addition, patients who switched from quetiapine, risperidone, aripiprazole, or ziprasidone showed significant improvement in MCS scores from baseline to extension endpoint. Responders to lurasidone demonstrated greater improvement in PETiT total, psychosocial functioning, and MCS scores at extension baseline than nonresponders. CONCLUSIONS: After switching to lurasidone, patients with schizophrenia experienced HRQoL improvements that were sustained for an additional 24 weeks of treatment. Further study is warranted to understand the implications of these improvements in terms of employment, adherence, relapse, and rehospitalization. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials.gov identifier NCT01143090 (June 10th, 2010).

Long-term safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in schizophrenia: a 22-month, open-label extension study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of lurasidone in the long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: Patients who completed a 6-week, double-blind (DB), placebo-controlled trial continued in a 22-month, open-label (OL) study during which they received once-daily, flexible-doses of lurasidone, 40-120 mg. Change in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) was analyzed using both observed case (OC) and last observation carried forward (LOCF) analyses. RESULTS: Of the 251 patients who entered the OL extension, 51.4% completed 6 months, 36.7% completed 12 months, and 26.7% completed 22 months of OL treatment. Treatment with lurasidone was associated with a mean change from DB baseline, in weight of +0.4 kg at Month 12 (n=99), and +0.8 kg at Month 24 (n=67; OC analyses). Median change from DB baseline to Month 12 and Month 24, respectively, was -1.0 and -9.0 mg/dL for total cholesterol; 0.0 and -1.0 mg/dL for LDL; +1.0 and -11.0 mg/dL for triglycerides; and 0.0 and +0.1/% for HbA1c (OC analyses). The mean PANSS total score was 96.5 at DB baseline and 69.5 at OL baseline. The mean change from DB baseline in the PANSS total score at Month 24 was -43.6 (OC) and -28.4 (LOCF). Thirty-seven patients (14.7%) discontinued due to an adverse event (AE) during OL treatment. Three AEs occurred in ≥10% of patients: schizophrenia (12.4%), akathisia (10.8%), and somnolence (10.8%); and 19.2% reported at least one movement disorder-related AE. Discontinuations due to AEs occurred in 14.8% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: In this 22-month, open-label extension study, treatment with lurasidone was associated with minimal effects on weight, glucose, lipids, and prolactin. Patients demonstrated sustained improvement in the PANSS total score for up to 24 months of lurasidone treatment.

Lurasidone Dose Response in Bipolar Depression: A Population Dose-response Analysis.

PURPOSE: Characterization of dose-response relationships for psychotropic agents may be difficult to determine based on results of individual clinical studies, particularly those with a flexible dose design. The goal of this pharmacometric analysis was to characterize the dose-response profile for lurasidone in patients with bipolar depression. METHODS: The statistical modeling and simulation analyses reported here were derived from 2 randomized, 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose studies (20-60 mg/d or 80-120 mg/d of lurasidone as monotherapy or 20-120 mg/d adjunct to lithium or valproate) in patients with bipolar depression. Pooled data included 5245 Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) observations from 825 patients who had received lurasidone or placebo treatments, with or without lithium or valproate background medication. FINDINGS: The time course of placebo effect on the MADRS score was adequately described by an exponential asymptotic placebo model. A linear dose-response model best described the effect of lurasidone. The net improvement in MADRS score due to lurasidone treatment (the drug effect) was significant (P < 0.001), and a positive dose response was detected. Net drug effect after 6 weeks of treatment was estimated to be a 6.0-point decrease in MADRS score per 100 mg of lurasidone. Covariate effects (for age and lithium or valproate use) were significant only for placebo effect parameters; thus, no dose adjustment was necessary related to demographic covariates. IMPLICATIONS: This population dose-response modeling analysis indicates that higher doses of lurasidone are likely to produce greater therapeutic effects in patients with bipolar depression. The linear dose response was consistent for both lurasidone monotherapy and adjunctive therapy in patients with bipolar depression. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00868452, NCT00868699.

The development of lurasidone for bipolar depression.

Bipolar disorder is a chronic, recurrent illness that ranks among the top 10 causes of disability in the developed world. As the illness progresses, major depressive episodes increasingly predominate. However, few treatment options are available that have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of bipolar depression, either as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in combination with mood stabilizers. Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic drug that was initially developed for the treatment of schizophrenia. Since no previous atypical antipsychotic development program had proceeded directly from work on schizophrenia to bipolar depression, the decision to focus on this indication represented an innovation in central nervous system drug development and was designed to address a clinically significant unmet need. The current review summarizes key results of a clinical development program undertaken to characterize the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in patients diagnosed with bipolar depression. Lurasidone is currently the only treatment for bipolar depression approved in the United States as both a monotherapy and an adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate. The approval of lurasidone expands available treatment options for patients with bipolar depression and provides a therapy with an overall favorable risk-benefit profile.

Health-related quality of life among patients treated with lurasidone: results from a switch trial in patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Patients with schizophrenia frequently switch between antipsychotics, underscoring the need to achieve and maintain important treatment outcomes such as health-related quality of life (HRQoL) following the switch. This analysis evaluated HRQoL changes among patients with schizophrenia switched from their current antipsychotic to lurasidone. METHODS: Stable but symptomatic outpatients with schizophrenia were switched from their current antipsychotic to lurasidone in a six-week, open-label trial. HRQoL was assessed using two validated patient-reported measures, the Personal Evaluation of Transitions in Treatment (PETiT) scale and the Short-Form 12 (SF-12). Total and domain scores (psychosocial function and adherence-related attitude) were assessed using the PETiT scale; patients' mental and physical component summary scores (MCS and PCS) were assessed using the SF-12. Changes in HRQoL from baseline to study endpoint were compared using ANCOVA, with baseline score, treatment, and pooled site as covariates. Changes were assessed among all patients and those switched from specific antipsychotics to lurasidone. RESULTS: The analysis included 235 patients with data on the PETiT and SF-12 who had received ≥ 1 dose of lurasidone. Statistically significant improvements were observed from baseline to study endpoint on the PETiT total (mean change [SD]: 3.2 [8.5]) and psychosocial functioning (2.5 [6.9]) and adherence-related attitude (0.7 [2.6]) domain scores (all p ≤ 0.002). When examined by preswitch antipsychotic, significant improvements in PETiT total scores were observed in patients switched from quetiapine, risperidone, aripiprazole, and ziprasidone (all p < 0.03) but not olanzapine (p = 0.893). Improvements on the SF-12 MCS score were observed for all patients (mean change [SD]: 3.7 [11.5], p < 0.001) and for those switched from quetiapine or aripiprazole (both p < 0.03). The SF-12 PCS scores remained comparable to those at baseline in all patient groups. CONCLUSIONS: These findings indicate that patients switching from other antipsychotics to lurasidone experienced statistically significant improvement of HRQoL, based on PETiT scores, within six weeks of treatment. Patient health status remained stable with respect to the SF-12 physical component and showed improvement on the mental component. Changes in HRQoL varied based on the antipsychotic used before switching to lurasidone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01143077.

Lurasidone monotherapy in the treatment of bipolar I depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. METHOD: Patients were randomly assigned to receive double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-60 mg/day [N=166] or 80-120 mg/day [N=169]) or placebo (N=170) for 6 weeks. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively. RESULTS: Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores at week 6 for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) compared with placebo (-10.7). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-1.8; effect size=0.61) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-1.7; effect size=0.50) compared with placebo (-1.1). Both lurasidone groups also experienced significant improvements compared with placebo in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were similar in the 20-60 mg/day (6.6%), 80-120 mg/day (5.9%), and placebo (6.5%) groups. The most frequent adverse events associated with lurasidone were nausea, headache, akathisia, and somnolence. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed with lurasidone. CONCLUSION: Monotherapy with lurasidone in the dosage range of 20-120 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression. Lurasidone was well tolerated, with few changes in weight or metabolic parameters.

Effectiveness of lurasidone in schizophrenia or schizoaffective patients switched from other antipsychotics: a 6-month, open-label, extension study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of lurasidone in schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder patients switched to lurasidone. METHOD: Patients in this multicenter, 6-month open-label, flexible-dose, extension study had completed a core 6-week randomized trial in which clinically stable, but symptomatic, outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were switched to lurasidone. Patients started the extension study on treatment with the same dose of lurasidone taken at study endpoint of the 6-week core study; following this, lurasidone was flexibly dosed (40-120 mg/day), if clinically indicated, starting on Day 7 of the extension study. The primary safety endpoints were the proportion of patients with treatment emergent adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, or who discontinued due to AEs. Secondary endpoints included metabolic variables and measures of extrapyramidal symptoms and akathisia, as well as the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S), and the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). The study was conducted from August 2010 to November 2011. RESULTS: Of the 198 patients who completed the 6-week core study, 149 (75.3%) entered the extension study and 148 received study medication. A total of 98 patients (65.8%) completed the 6-month extension study. Lurasidone 40, 80, and 120 mg were the modal daily doses for 19 (12.8%), 65 (43.9%), and 64 (43.2%) of patients, respectively. Overall mean (SD) daily lurasidone dose was 102.0 mg (77.1). The most commonly reported AEs were insomnia (13 patients [8.8%]), nausea (13 patients [8.8%]), akathisia (12 patients [8.1%]), and anxiety (9 patients [6.1%]). A total of 16 patients (10.8%) had at least one AE leading to discontinuation from the study. Consistent with prior studies of lurasidone, there was no signal for clinically relevant adverse changes in body weight, lipids, glucose, insulin, or prolactin. Movement disorder rating scales did not demonstrate meaningful changes. Treatment failure (defined as any occurrence of discontinuation due to insufficient clinical response, exacerbation of underlying disease, or AE) was observed for 19 patients (12.8% of patients entering) and median time to treatment failure was 58 days (95% CI 22-86). The discontinuation rate due to any cause was 50/148 (33.8%), and median time to discontinuation was 62 days (95% CI 30-75). The mean PANSS total score, mean CGI-S score, and mean CDSS score decreased consistently from core study baseline across extension visits, indicating an improvement in overall condition. CONCLUSIONS: In this 6-month, open-label extension study, treatment with lurasidone was generally well-tolerated with sustained improvement in efficacy measures observed in outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who had switched to lurasidone from a broad range of antipsychotic agents.

Effect of lurasidone on neurocognitive performance in patients with schizophrenia: a short-term placebo- and active-controlled study followed by a 6-month double-blind extension.

This double-blind study evaluated change in cognitive performance and functional capacity in lurasidone and quetiapine XR-treated schizophrenia patients over a 6-week, placebo-controlled study, followed by a 6-month, double-blind extension. Cognitive performance and functional capacity were assessed with the CogState computerized cognitive battery and the UPSA-B. Analyses were conducted for all subjects, as well as the subsample whose test scores met prespecified validity criteria. No statistically significant differences were found for change in the composite neurocognitive score for lurasidone (80 mg/day and 160 mg/day) groups, quetiapine XR and placebo in the full sample at week 6. For the evaluable sample (N = 267), lurasidone 160 mg was superior to both placebo and quetiapine on the neurocognitive composite, while lurasidone 80 mg, quetiapine XR, and placebo did not differ. UPSA-B scores were superior to placebo at 6 weeks for all treatments. In the double-blind extension study, analysis of the full sample showed significantly better cognitive performance in the lurasidone (40-160 mg) group compared to the quetiapine XR (200-800 mg) group at both 3 and 6 months. Cognitive and UPSA-B total scores were significantly correlated at baseline and for change over time. This is the first study to date where the investigational treatment was superior to placebo on both cognitive assessments and a functional coprimary measure at 6 weeks, as well as demonstrated superiority to an active comparator on cognitive assessments at 6 weeks and at 6 months of extension study treatment. These findings require replication, but are not due to practice effects, because of the placebo and active controls.

Effectiveness of lurasidone for patients with schizophrenia following 6 weeks of acute treatment with lurasidone, olanzapine, or placebo: a 6-month, open-label, extension study.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of lurasidone, a new atypical antipsychotic agent, in the longer-term treatment of schizophrenia (DSM-IV). Persistence of symptom improvement was assessed as a secondary outcome. METHOD: Patients who completed a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the efficacy of fixed doses of once-daily lurasidone (40 or 120 mg) or olanzapine 15 mg (to confirm assay sensitivity) were eligible to receive flexibly dosed lurasidone 40 to 120 mg/d in this 6-month, open-label extension study (conducted from March 2008 to December 2009). Assessments of safety and tolerability were conducted at open-label baseline, at day 10, and monthly thereafter. RESULTS: Of 254 enrolled patients, 113 (44.5%) completed 6 months of open-label treatment. During the open-label study (month 6 observed cases), small decreases were observed in mean weight (-0.1 kg) and median lipid levels (total cholesterol, -6.5 mg/dL; low-density lipoprotein, 0.0 mg/dL; high-density lipoprotein, 0.0 mg/dL; triglycerides, -8.5 mg/dL). Patients previously treated with olanzapine (n = 69) experienced decrease in weight and improvement in lipid levels, whereas patients previously treated with lurasidone (n = 115) or placebo (n = 62) experienced minimal changes. No clinically meaningful changes were observed in median prolactin levels. The 2 most commonly reported adverse events were akathisia (13.0%) and insomnia (11.0%). Persistent antipsychotic efficacy of lurasidone was shown for patients who had previously received lurasidone, olanzapine, or placebo; further reductions from open-label baseline to final visit were observed in mean PANSS total score (-8.7) for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Open-label treatment with flexibly dosed lurasidone (40-120 mg/d) was generally safe, well tolerated, and effective over a 6-month period in patients who had completed a preceding 6-week, double-blind study.

Effectiveness of lurasidone in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder switched from other antipsychotics: a randomized, 6-week, open-label study.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness of switching patients to lurasidone using 3 different dosing strategies. METHOD: Adults with DSM-IV-defined schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder in a nonacute phase of illness were randomized to 1 of 3 lurasidone dosing regimens for the initial 2 weeks of the study: (1) 40 mg/d for 2 weeks; (2) 40 mg/d for 1 week, increased to 80 mg/d on day 8 for week 2 (up-titration group); and (3) 80 mg/d for 2 weeks. Lurasidone was then flexibly dosed (40-120 mg/d) for the subsequent 4 weeks of the study. The preswitch antipsychotic agent was tapered by day 7 to 50% of the original dose and discontinued by the end of week 2. Subjects were stratified on the basis of whether the primary preswitch antipsychotic medication was classified as "sedating" (olanzapine or quetiapine) or "nonsedating" (all other antipsychotics). The primary outcome measure was time to treatment failure, defined as any occurrence of insufficient clinical response, exacerbation of underlying disease, or discontinuation due to an adverse event. The study was conducted from June 2010 to May 2011. RESULTS: Of 240 subjects treated in this study, 86 (35.8%) were treated with an antecedent sedating antipsychotic, and 154 (64.2%) were treated with an antecedent nonsedating antipsychotic. Nineteen (7.9%) of the 240 patients experienced treatment failure. No clinically relevant differences were observed when the 3 randomized switch groups were compared. Treatment failure rates were 10/86 (11.6%) versus 9/154 (5.8%) among subjects who had been receiving a preswitch sedating versus nonsedating antipsychotic medication, respectively. Consistent with prior studies of lurasidone, there was no signal for clinically relevant adverse changes in body weight, glucose, insulin, lipids, or prolactin; mean improvements in weight and lipids were observed. Movement disorder rating scales did not demonstrate meaningful changes. The incidence of akathisia as an adverse event was 12.5%; only 1 subject (0.4%) discontinued due to akathisia. CONCLUSIONS: Switching patients to lurasidone can be successfully accomplished by starting at 40 mg/d for 2 weeks, or 80 mg/d for 2 weeks, or 40 mg/d for 1 week followed by 80 mg/d the second week. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01143077.

Lurasidone for the treatment of acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia: a 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled study.

Despite the availability of established antipsychotic agents for the treatment of schizophrenia, continued unmet needs exist for effective medications with lower adverse-effect burden. The present study evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatment with the atypical antipsychotic lurasidone for patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Patients were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone 40 mg/day, 80 mg/day, or 120 mg/day, or placebo. Changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scores were evaluated using mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis. Vital signs, laboratory parameters, extrapyramidal symptoms, and electrocardiogram were assessed. Treatment with lurasidone 80 mg/day resulted in significantly greater improvement in PANSS total score compared with placebo (-23.4 versus -17.0; p < 0.05) at study endpoint (MMRM); lurasidone 40 mg/day and 120 mg/day achieved clinically meaningful overall PANSS score reductions from baseline (-19.2 and -20.5), but not significant separation from placebo. Differences between all lurasidone groups and placebo for changes in laboratory parameters and electrocardiographic measures were minimal. Weight gain ≥ 7% occurred in 8.2% of patients receiving lurasidone and 3.2% receiving placebo. Modest increases in prolactin (median increase, 0.7 ng/mL) and extrapyramidal symptoms were observed following treatment with lurasidone compared with placebo. Akathisia was the most commonly reported adverse event with lurasidone (17.6%, versus 3.1% with placebo). In this study, in which a large placebo response was observed, lurasidone 80 mg/day, but not 40 mg/day or 120 mg/day, was statistically superior to placebo in treating acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia. All lurasidone doses were generally well tolerated.

Local disruption of the celiac ganglion inhibits substance P release and ameliorates caerulein-induced pancreatitis in rats.

Primary sensory neurons of the C and Adelta subtypes express the vanilloid capsaicin receptor TRPV1 and contain proinflammatory peptides such as substance P (SP) that mediate neurogenic inflammation. Pancreatic injury stimulates these neurons causing the release of SP in the pancreas resulting in pancreatic edema and neutrophil infiltration that contributes to pancreatitis. Axons of primary sensory neurons innervating the pancreas course through the celiac ganglion. We hypothesized that disruption of the celiac ganglion by surgical excision or inhibition of C and Adelta fibers through blockade of TRPV1 would reduce the severity of experimental pancreatitis by inhibiting neurogenic inflammation. Resiniferatoxin (RTX) is a specific TRPV1 agonist that, in high doses, selectively destroys C and Adelta fibers. Sprague-Dawley rats underwent surgical ganglionectomy or application of 10 microg RTX (vs. vehicle alone) to the celiac ganglion. One week later, pancreatitis was induced by six hourly intraperitoneal injections of caerulein (50 microg/kg). The severity of pancreatitis was assessed by serum amylase, pancreatic edema, and pancreatic myeloperoxidase (MPO) activity. SP receptor (neurokinin-1 receptor, NK-1R) internalization in acinar cells, used as an index of endogenous SP release, was assessed by immunocytochemical quantification of NK-1R endocytosis. Caerulein administration caused significant increases in pancreatic edema, serum amylase, MPO activity, and NK-1R internalization. RTX treatment and ganglionectomy significantly reduced pancreatic edema by 46% (P < 0.001) and NK-1R internalization by 80% and 51% (P < 0.001 and P < 0.05, respectively). RTX administration also significantly reduced MPO activity by 47% (P < 0.05). Neither treatment affected serum amylase, consistent with a direct effect of caerulein. These results demonstrate that disruption of or local application of RTX to the celiac ganglion inhibits SP release in the pancreas and reduces the severity of acute secretagogue-induced pancreatitis. It is possible that selectively disrupting TRPV1-bearing neurons could be used to reduce pancreatitis severity.