Quality Evaluation of Shexiang Tongxin Dropping Pill Based on HPLC Fingerprints Combined with HPLC-Q-TOF-MS/MS Method.

Shexiang Tongxin Dropping Pill (STP) is a composite formula of traditional Chinese medicine that is widely used for the treatment of cardiovascular diseases. It consists of seven medicinal extracts thereof or materials, including Bufonis venenum, synthetic Moschus, Panax ginseng, Bovis calculus artifactus, Bear bile powder, Salvia miltiorrhiza Bge and synthetic borneol. However, it is considerably difficult to evaluate the quality of STP due to its complex chemical compositions. This paper was designed to explore a comprehensive and systematic method combining fingerprints and chemical identification for quality assessment of STP samples. Twenty batches of STP samples were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and high-performance liquid chromatography-quadrupole time-of-flight tandem mass spectrometry. Ten common peaks were detected by HPLC fingerprint similarity evaluation system. Meanwhile, 100 compounds belonging to 4 structural characteristics, including 23 bufadienolides, 36 organic acids, 34 saponins and 7 other types, were systematically identified as the basic components in STP. This study could be used for clarifying the multiple bioactive substances and developing a comprehensive quality evaluation method of STP.

Clinical study on the treatment of primary trigeminal neuralgia by robot-assisted percutaneous balloon compression.

Background: C-arm-guided percutaneous puncture balloon compression alone has risk factors of puncture failure, complications, and poor prognosis. Robot-assisted PBC can effectively increase the one-time puncture success rate and improve the safety of the procedure. However, evidence on the superiority of robot-assisted PBC over C-arm-guided PBC alone remains relatively limited. Methods: Retrospective analysis The clinical data of 60 patients with trigeminal neuralgia aged 60 years or older in the Department of Neurosurgery of the Fourth Hospital of Harbin Medical University from January 2021 to October 2021. There were 29 males and 31 females, and the patients' ages ranged from 60 to 79 years, with an average of 71.63 ± 5.12 years. Two groups were divided according to the surgical method, the C-arm guidance-only group (30 cases, n = 30) and the robot-assisted group (30 cases, n = 30). The success rate of first puncture, total operation time, number of "pear-shaped" balloons, number of C-arm x-ray scans, and immediate postoperative relief rate were recorded in both groups, and follow-up was performed to evaluate the postoperative results and complications. The overall evaluation of postoperative results and complications was performed. Results: Intraoperative balloon compression was successfully completed in all 60 patients, and the first puncture success rate was higher in the robot-assisted group than in the simple C-arm group, with a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.001). In terms of intraoperative balloon morphology, the number of "pear-shaped" balloons was higher in the PBC than in the C-arm-only PBC group, with a significant difference between the two groups (P < 0.005). The degree of immediate postoperative remission in the robotic group was 0 VAS score, which was not statistically significant in both groups (P > 0.05). By the final follow-up, the mean VAS score of the robot-assisted group was lower than that of the simple C-arm group, and both were statistically significant (P < 0.05); complications of masticatory muscle weakness or abnormal facial sensation occurred in both groups after surgery, but the number of cases in the robot-assisted group was less than that of the simple C-arm group. Conclusion: Robot-assisted PBC is better than PBC with a C-arm x-ray machine in terms of first puncture success rate, number of intraoperative balloon "pear-shaped" cases, number of C-arm x-ray scans and short-term efficacy.

Randomized, 6-Week, Placebo-Controlled Study of Treatment for Adult Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Individualized Dosing of Osmotic-Release Oral System (OROS) Methylphenidate With a Goal of Symptom Remission.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of individualized dosing within the approved dose range for osmotic-release oral system (OROS) methylphenidate hydrochloride in adults with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: A double-blind, 6-week trial was conducted between July 2009 and February 2010 at 35 US sites. Adults with ADHD (DSM-IV diagnostic criteria) and a screening ADHD Investigator Symptom Rating Scale (AISRS) score > 24 were randomly assigned to OROS methylphenidate 18 mg or matching placebo. Treatment dose could be increased at 18 mg increments, up to 72 mg/d, until an optimal dose was achieved. AISRS score changes from baseline to end point (primary outcome) were analyzed using analysis of covariance. RESULTS: At baseline, the intent-to-treat population of 169 OROS methylphenidate and 172 placebo subjects (mean age = 35.8 years) had mean (standard deviation [SD]) AISRS scores of 37.8 (6.94) and 37.0 (7.51), respectively. OROS methylphenidate-treated subjects exhibited a significantly greater mean (SD) AISRS score improvement than placebo subjects (-17.1 [12.44] vs -11.7 [13.30]; P < .001). In general, OROS methylphenidate-treated subjects experienced greater improvements than placebo subjects in secondary measures of symptom frequency, cognitive function, work productivity, and quality-of-life. Little effect of OROS methylphenidate was observed in exploratory sleep assessments. The adverse event pattern was similar to previous reports of stimulants in adults with ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: OROS methylphenidate treatment with individualized doses titrated to achieve symptom remission demonstrated greater ADHD symptom reduction than placebo treatment. These data support the overall efficacy of OROS methylphenidate treatment in the management of adults with ADHD and provide new possibilities for additional intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00937040.

Economic outcomes with prasugrel versus clopidogrel in acute coronary syndrome patients: observations from prasugrel users and matched clopidogrel users.

OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare costs between clopidogrel and prasugrel over 30-day and 365-day periods after discharge from the hospital or emergency room (ER) in patients treated with prasugrel who were hospitalized or had an ER visit for an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) event. METHODS: This retrospective observational study was based on claims from January 2009-July 2012 in the Truven Health Analytics MarketScan database. Clopidogrel patients were propensity-score matched 1:1 to prasugrel-treated patients. Lin's frequentist cost history method for censored data and Bayesian zero-inflated gamma regression models were used to analyze healthcare costs. RESULTS: The clopidogrel/prasugrel matched-cohort included 10,963 well-matched pairs of patients. Lin's frequentist analysis showed that outpatient visit costs were significantly lower for clopidogrel than prasugrel after 30 days of follow-up. At 30 days, Bayesian data analysis showed strong evidence that clopidogrel was superior to prasugrel for all-cause and ACS-related hospitalization costs and showed very strong evidence that clopidogrel was superior to prasugrel for all-cause and ACS-related outpatient visit costs. At 365 days, Bayesian data analysis showed strong evidence that clopidogrel was superior to prasugrel for all-cause outpatient visit costs and very strong evidence that clopidogrel was superior to prasugrel for ACS-related outpatient visit costs. Point estimates of the all-cause and ACS-related ER visit costs at 30 days and 365 days were similar, but statistical results were inconclusive because of the large variability in this outcome variable. CONCLUSION: Based on retrospective observational data in a real-world setting, all-cause and ACS-related hospitalization and outpatient visit costs were lower for clopidogrel than prasugrel over 30 days after discharge from a hospitalization or ER visit associated with ACS in patients treated with prasugrel. At 365 days the difference in all-cause and ACS-related outpatient costs remained, but there was little evidence of a difference in either all-cause or ACS-related hospitalization costs.

Onset and persistence of efficacy by symptom domain with long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate in patients with schizophrenia.

INTRODUCTION: Several long-acting injectable (LAI) second-generation antipsychotics are now available for the management of schizophrenia. As patients with schizophrenia frequently present with diverse and challenging symptoms, it is important to understand the effects of antipsychotics in treating these different symptom subgroups and the timing of these responses. AREAS COVERED: For this review, data from two randomized, double-blind trials were analyzed in respect to the onset and persistence of effects on several measures of psychopathology (as measured by the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS]) after treatment with LAI paliperidone palmitate (PP) (NCT00590577 and NCT00589914). EXPERT OPINION: Symptom reductions from baseline with PP were significant by day 4 for all five PANSS factors in both studies. Some effects may have been driven by the presence or absence of a placebo response. A significant effect for PP versus placebo was observed for all major symptom domains for one or more doses of PP during the first month of treatment. Once established, most (but not all) significant responses persisted to the end point. Similar improvements were observed in PANSS scores with PP and oral risperidone. Dose-dependent trends were observed for the effect of PP on positive, negative and uncontrolled hostility/excitement symptoms.

Paliperidone palmitate versus oral risperidone and risperidone long-acting injection in patients with recently diagnosed schizophrenia: a tolerability and efficacy comparison.

Early in the course of illness, patients with schizophrenia may be particularly susceptible to adverse events (AEs). In this post-hoc, subgroup analysis of a 13-week, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter study, patients recently diagnosed with schizophrenia (≤ 5 years) were administered once-monthly flexible-dose paliperidone palmitate (PP) (n=161; initiation doses, 150 mg eq day 1 and 100 mg eq day 8) [PP doses can be expressed as milligram equivalents (mg eq) of paliperidone or as milligrams (mg) of PP. 150 mg eq paliperidone=234 mg PP; 100 mg eq paliperidone=156 mg PP. In the USA, dosing tends to be expressed in mg] or oral risperidone [during initiation of risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI) days 1-28] and biweekly flexible-dose RLAI (n=173; initial injection day 8). Assessments were performed at baseline and days 4, 15, 22, 36, 64, and 92. Because of RLAI's release profile, data through day 22 correspond to oral risperidone in the RLAI arm. During this period, the AE profile and onset of efficacy of PP and oral risperidone were similar. The overall AE rates at week 13 for PP and RLAI were 54.7 and 50.3%, respectively, for any AE; 11.2 and 8.1% for extrapyramidal symptom-related AEs; and 2.5 and 2.3% for prolactin-related AEs. No significant differences in the mean weight change, most metabolic parameters, or mean efficacy measures were observed at end point. In patients with recently diagnosed schizophrenia, the tolerability and efficacy of PP and RLAI were generally similar over 13 weeks.

Paliperidone palmitate versus risperidone long-acting injection in markedly-to-severely ill schizophrenia subjects: onset of efficacy with recommended initiation regimens.

OBJECTIVE: To examine onset of efficacy of two long-acting injectable atypical antipsychotics in markedly-to-severely ill schizophrenia subjects. METHODS: This subgroup analysis included 292 subjects with baseline Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores of markedly ill or worse from a 13-week, randomized, double-dummy noninferiority study (NCT00589914). Subjects received either: 1) paliperidone palmitate (PP; 234 mg day 1 and 156 mg day 8 [corresponding to 150 and 100 milligram equivalents of paliperidone, respectively], both administered in deltoid muscle, followed by once-monthly flexible dosing in deltoid or gluteal muscle) and risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI)-matched placebo injections; or, 2) RLAI (25 mg, days 8 and 22; followed by biweekly flexible dosing) and PP-matched placebo injections. RLAI subjects received oral risperidone days 1-28; PP subjects received oral placebo. Because of RLAI's release profile, data through day 22 correspond to oral risperidone. Assessments included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and adverse event (AE) reports. Paired t-tests assessed within-group changes. RESULTS: LS mean (SE) PANSS total scores improved significantly (both p<.001) with PP and oral risperidone by day 4 (-5.0 [0.6] and -3.4 [0.6], respectively) through day 22; and with PP and RLAI through end point (-21.5 [1.9] and -18.6 [1.9], respectively). The between-group difference was significant only at day 4 (p=.006). Proportion of subjects with a .30% reduction in PANSS total score was not significantly different between the two groups at day 4 and was significantly greater with paliperidone palmitate than oral risperidone at days 15 and 22 (26.1% versus 12.7%, p=.013; 41.6% versus 32.0%, p=.048, respectively). Most common AEs (.5% in either treatment group): headache (PP 6.3% and RLAI 14.0%), insomnia (10.6% and 10.7%), somnolence (7.8% and 1.3%), akathisia (7.0% and 5.3%), schizophrenia (8.5% and 5.3%), agitation (5.6% and 2.0%), and injection site pain (5.6% and 1.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Using the recommended dosing regimens for PP and RLAI, both PP and oral risperidone (used during RLAI initiation) improved symptoms of schizophrenia in markedly-to-severely ill subjects at days 4-22.

Bayesian data analysis in observational comparative effectiveness research: rationale and examples.

Many comparative effectiveness research and patient-centered outcomes research studies will need to be observational for one or both of two reasons: first, randomized trials are expensive and time-consuming; and second, only observational studies can answer some research questions. It is generally recognized that there is a need to increase the scientific validity and efficiency of observational studies. Bayesian methods for the design and analysis of observational studies are scientifically valid and offer many advantages over frequentist methods, including, importantly, the ability to conduct comparative effectiveness research/patient-centered outcomes research more efficiently. Bayesian data analysis is being introduced into outcomes studies that we are conducting. Our purpose here is to describe our view of some of the advantages of Bayesian methods for observational studies and to illustrate both realized and potential advantages by describing studies we are conducting in which various Bayesian methods have been or could be implemented.

Paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injectable in subjects with schizophrenia recently treated with oral risperidone or other oral antipsychotics.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc subgroup analysis of a randomized, double-blind trial evaluated the response to treatment with two long-acting injectable atypical antipsychotics, ie, paliperidone palmitate and risperidone long-acting injectable (RLAI), in subjects with schizophrenia experiencing clinically significant symptoms despite recent treatment with oral risperidone only or other oral antipsychotics. METHODS: Adult subjects were eligible for the 13-week, double-blind, double-dummy trial (NCT00589914) if they had an established diagnosis of schizophrenia for at least one year and a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score of 60-120 inclusive at screening. Subjects received either paliperidone palmitate (234 mg, day 1; 156 mg, day 8; then once-monthly flexible dosing) or RLAI (25-50 mg biweekly, with oral risperidone supplementation on days 1-28), plus matched placebo injections/tablets. RESULTS: This post hoc analysis reports data on 747 subjects who, within 2 weeks of starting double-blind study medication, had reportedly received oral risperidone only (paliperidone palmitate group, n = 126; RLAI group, n = 107), other oral antipsychotics (paliperidone palmitate group, n = 199; RLAI group, n = 203), or no antipsychotic (paliperidone palmitate group, n = 56; RLAI group, n = 56). Mean PANSS total scores improved significantly at end point across all subgroups (mean change from baseline ranged from -17.5 to -19.5, all P < 0.0001). Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Personal and Social Performance scale measures also significantly improved from baseline (all P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Treatment with paliperidone palmitate or RLAI resulted in a significant reduction in the symptoms of schizophrenia irrespective of previous recent treatment with oral risperidone only or other oral antipsychotics. For subjects who had previously received oral risperidone only, the difference in formulation was the main change in the intervention because the molecule delivered remained the same or similar. These data support the contribution of a long-acting formulation to improving the treatment response and suggest that nonadherence may be a significant contributor to inadequate efficacy of oral formulations in subjects with schizophrenia.

[Research on the analytical line auto-selection for quantitative analysis of materials with laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy].

To realize auto-selection of analytical lines for quantitative analysis of materials with laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy, two parameters, i. e. the relative detected-to-theory intensity ratio (RDTIR) and wavelength difference of detected and theory (WDDT) were defined. The spectral lines seriously disturbed by self-absorption and spectral interference were excluded automatically by setting reasonable thresholds of RDTIR and WDDT. By analyzing the experimental data of high-alloy steel (GBW01605), the analytical lines of iron (Fe), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), manganese (Mn) and copper (Cu) were selected, and the results were in line with the principle of lines selection.

Effects of acute paliperidone palmitate treatment in subjects with schizophrenia recently treated with oral risperidone.

OBJECTIVE: To examine efficacy and safety of acute treatment with paliperidone palmitate in subjects with schizophrenia whose disease remained symptomatic despite recent treatment with oral risperidone. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a 13-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of subjects with symptomatic schizophrenia randomized to paliperidone palmitate 39, 156, or 234 mg (25, 100, or 150 mg equivalents of paliperidone) or placebo. Paliperidone palmitate subjects received a 234-mg day 1 dose, followed by their assigned dose on day 8 and monthly thereafter. Subjects treated with oral risperidone within 2 weeks before randomization regardless of duration were included. ASSESSMENTS: PANSS, CGI-S, PSP scores; AEs. ANCOVA models with LOCF methodology evaluated treatment group differences. RESULTS: 216 subjects received prior oral risperidone (paliperidone palmitate 39 mg, n=53; 156 mg, n=58; 234 mg, n=48; placebo, n=57). Median prior risperidone use was 22 days. Significant improvement was observed with paliperidone palmitate 156-mg or 234-mg versus placebo in least-squares mean (SE) score change at end point in PANSS total (156 mg, -15.8 [3.0], p=0.0001; 234 mg, -17.6 [3.2], p=0.0001), CGI-S (156 mg, -0.9 [0.2], p=0.0068; 234 mg, -1.1 [0.2], p=0.0003), and PSP (156 mg, 10.7 [2.3], p=0.0061; 234 mg, 12.9 [2.4], p=0.0009). Most common AEs (≥10%) in any paliperidone palmitate group were insomnia, anxiety, and headache. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with schizophrenia who recently received oral risperidone but who remained symptomatic, acute treatment with monthly doses of 156-mg and 234-mg paliperidone palmitate significantly improved clinical symptoms, global illness ratings, and functioning compared with placebo, with no unexpected safety findings.

Onset of efficacy and tolerability following the initiation dosing of long-acting paliperidone palmitate: post-hoc analyses of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Paliperidone palmitate is a long-acting injectable atypical antipsychotic for the acute and maintenance treatment of adults with schizophrenia. The recommended initiation dosing regimen is 234 mg on Day 1 and 156 mg on Day 8 via intramuscular (deltoid) injection; followed by 39 to 234 mg once-monthly thereafter (deltoid or gluteal). These post-hoc analyses addressed two commonly encountered clinical issues regarding the initiation dosing: the time to onset of efficacy and the associated tolerability. METHODS: In a 13-week double-blind trial, 652 subjects with schizophrenia were randomized to paliperidone palmitate 39, 156, or 234 mg (corresponding to 25, 100, or 150 mg equivalents of paliperidone, respectively) or placebo (NCT#00590577). Subjects randomized to paliperidone palmitate received 234 mg on Day 1, followed by their randomized fixed dose on Day 8, and monthly thereafter, with no oral antipsychotic supplementation. The onset of efficacy was defined as the first timepoint where the paliperidone palmitate group showed significant improvement in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score compared to placebo (Analysis of Covariance [ANCOVA] models and Last Observation Carried Forward [LOCF] methodology without adjusting for multiplicity) using data from the Days 4, 8, 22, and 36 assessments. Adverse event (AE) rates and relative risks (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) versus placebo were determined. RESULTS: Paliperidone palmitate 234 mg on Day 1 was associated with greater improvement than placebo on Least Squares (LS) mean PANSS total score at Day 8 (p=0.037). After the Day 8 injection of 156 mg, there was continued PANSS improvement at Day 22 (p≤0.007 vs. placebo) and Day 36 (p<0.001). Taken together with results in the 39 mg and 234 mg Day 8 arms, these findings suggest a trend towards a dose-dependent response. During Days 1 to 7, AEs reported in ≥2% of paliperidone palmitate subjects (234 mg) and a greater proportion of paliperidone palmitate than placebo subjects were: agitation (3.2% vs. 1.3%; RR 2.52 [95% CI 0.583, 10.904]), headache (4.0% vs. 3.8%; RR 1.06 [95% CI 0.433, 2.619]), and injection site pain (6.7% vs. 3.8%; RR 1.79 [95% CI 0.764, 4.208]). Days 8 to 36 AEs meeting the same criteria in the 156 mg Day 8 arm were: anxiety (3.1% vs. 2.5%; RR 1.24 [95% CI 0.340, 4.542]), psychotic disorder (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]), dizziness (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]), and injection site pain (2.5% vs. 1.3%; RR 1.99 [95% CI 0.369, 10.699]). Corresponding Days 8 to 36 AEs in the 39 mg Day 8 group were: agitation (4.5% vs. 4.4%; RR 1.03 [95% CI 0.371, 2.874]), anxiety (3.9% vs. 2.5%; RR 1.55 [95% CI 0.446, 5.381]), and psychotic disorder (2.6% vs. 1.3%; RR 2.07 [95% CI 0.384, 11.110]) while in the 234 mg Day 8 group it was anxiety (3.1% vs. 2.5%, RR 1.25 [95% CI 0.342, 4.570]). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly greater symptom improvement was observed by Day 8 with paliperidone palmitate (234 mg on Day 1) compared to placebo; this effect was maintained after the 156 mg Day 8 injection, with a trend towards a dose-dependent response. No unexpected tolerability findings were noted in the first week or month after the initiation dosing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT#00590577.

Onset of efficacy with acute long-acting injectable paliperidone palmitate treatment in markedly to severely ill patients with schizophrenia: post hoc analysis of a randomized, double-blind clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This post hoc analysis (trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00590577) assessed onset of efficacy and tolerability of acute treatment with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP), a long-acting atypical antipsychotic initiated by day 1 and day 8 injections, in a markedly to severely ill schizophrenia population. METHODS: Subjects entering the 13-week, double-blind trial were randomized to PP (39, 156, or 234 mg [25, 100, and 150 mg eq of paliperidone, respectively]) or placebo. This subgroup analysis included those with a baseline Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score indicating marked to severe illness. PP subjects received a 234-mg day 1 injection (deltoid), followed by their assigned dose on day 8 and monthly thereafter (deltoid or gluteal). Thus, data for PP groups were pooled for days 4 and 8. Measures included Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), CGI-S, Personal and Social Performance (PSP), and adverse events (AEs). Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) and last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) methodologies, without multiplicity adjustments, were used to assess changes in continuous measures. Onset of efficacy was defined as the first time point a treatment group showed significant PANSS improvement (assessed days 4, 8, 22, 36, 64, and 92) versus placebo, which was maintained through end point. RESULTS: A total of 312 subjects met inclusion criterion for this subgroup analysis. After the day 1 injection, mean PANSS total scores improved significantly with PP (all received 234 mg) versus placebo at day 4 (P = 0.012) and day 8 (P = 0.007). After the day 8 injection, a significant PANSS improvement persisted at all subsequent time points in the 234-mg group versus placebo (P < 0.05). PANSS improvements were greater from day 36 through end point in the 156-mg group (P < 0.05) and only at end point in the 39-mg group (P < 0.05). CGI-S and PSP scores improved significantly in the 234-mg and 156-mg PP groups versus placebo at end point (P < 0.05 for both, respectively); improvement in the 39-mg group was not significant. The most common AEs for PP-treated subjects (≥10%, any treatment group) were headache, insomnia, schizophrenia exacerbation, injection site pain, and agitation. CONCLUSIONS: In this markedly to severely ill population, acute treatment with 234 mg PP improved psychotic symptoms compared with placebo by day 4. After subsequent injections, observed improvements are suggestive of a dose-dependent effect. No unexpected tolerability findings were noted.

Tolerability of initiation doses of once-monthly paliperidone palmitate in patients with recently diagnosed schizophrenia in an acute treatment trial.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the tolerability of the recommended initiation doses for once-monthly injectable paliperidone palmitate in patients who have recently been diagnosed with schizophrenia and for whom high doses may pose tolerability concerns. METHODS: A post hoc analysis from a 13-week double-blind study of patients with schizophrenia randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo or paliperidone palmitate at 25, 100, or 150 mg equivalents (mg eq) of paliperidone (corresponding to 39, 156, or 234 mg respectively). This analysis focused on the recently diagnosed subgroup (≤5 years; N = 146) who received the recommended initiation dosage of paliperidone palmitate [150 mg eq on day 1 (n = 109) followed by 100 mg eq on day 8 (n = 39)] or placebo (n = 37). Adverse events (AEs), reported in ≥2% of patients receiving paliperidone palmitate during days 1-7 or ≥5% during days 8-36, and in a higher percentage of patients receiving paliperidone palmitate than placebo, were identified. AE relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were determined. A RR was considered potentially significant when its 95% CI did not include 1. RESULTS: Overall, day 1-7 AE rates were 37.6% (41 of 109) and 29.7% (11 of 37) with paliperidone palmitate and placebo respectively; injection site pain (5.5% versus 2.7%, RR 2.0; 95% CI 0.25 to 16.37), agitation (4.6% versus 2.7%; RR 1.7; 95% CI 0.21 to 14.06), and headache (3.7% versus 0.0%; RR 3.1; 95% CI 0.17 to 56.41) met the ≥2% criteria. Day 8-36 AE rates were 41.0% (16 of 39) and 37.8% (14 of 37) with paliperidone palmitate and placebo respectively; anxiety (5.1% versus 0.0%; RR 4.8; 95% CI 0.24 to 95.76) met the ≥5% criteria. Key limitations were that some patients may have been ill for a significant time before formal diagnosis and that the number of patients is low in this subgroup, limiting the ability to detect statistical significance for AE RRs. CONCLUSIONS: Paliperidone palmitate initiation doses (150 mg eq day 1, 100 mg eq day 8) were tolerated in this subgroup of patients who were recently diagnosed with schizophrenia, with no unexpected findings. Although the same size was small, these data identified AEs that may be encountered during the week and month after initiation dosing. These findings may assist clinicians when paliperidone palmitate is considered an appropriate treatment choice for these patients.

A Prospective Study Comparing the Long-term Effectiveness of Injectable Risperidone Long-acting Therapy and Oral Aripiprazole in Patients with Schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that long-term maintenance with injectable risperidone long-acting therapy is superior to oral daily aripiprazole in stable patients with schizophrenia. DESIGN: This two-year, rater-blinded, open-label, multicenter study (NCT00299702) randomized subjects to injectable risperidone long-acting therapy (25-50mg, injected every 2 weeks) or oral aripiprazole (5-30mg/day), with study visits every two weeks. Subjects who met relapse criteria or discontinued study drug could remain in the study. SETTING: Clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Stable subjects with schizophrenia not adequately benefiting from current treatment who experienced two or more relapses in the past two years. If recently relapsed, subjects were stabilized (per clinician judgment) for two or more months before entry. MEASUREMENTS: Primary endpoints: time to relapse and time in remission. Safety assessments included adverse event reporting. RESULTS: Of 355 subjects randomized, 349 were in the intent-to-treat analysis set. Data inspection revealed that 53 (14.9%) randomized subjects deviated from inclusion/exclusion criteria, most commonly not meeting stability requirements. At baseline, mean (standard deviation [SD]) Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score was 68.9 (14.6); 115 (33.0%) intent-to-treat subjects met remission criteria. Approximately 29 percent in each group discontinued the study before completing two years. No significant between-group differences were noted in time to relapse or time in remission. No new tolerability issues were identified. CONCLUSION: RESULTS failed to demonstrate superiority with injectable risperidone long-acting therapy versus oral aripiprazole. The study design did not allow for valid conclusions of equivalence or noninferiority. Although this study attempted to mimic a real-world treatment setting for stable patients, the broad study population, the lack of patient selection for nonadherence, biweekly visits, regular assessments, and other design issues limited generalizability and interpretation relative to the study hypothesis.