Effects of esketamine nasal spray on depressive symptom severity in adults with treatment-resistant depression and associations between the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and the 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of esketamine nasal spray (ESK) plus newly initiated oral antidepressant (OAD) versus OAD plus placebo nasal spray (PBO) on the association between Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and 9-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores in adults with treatment-resistant depression (TRD). METHODS: Data from TRANSFORM-1 and TRANSFORM-2 (two similarly designed, randomized, active-controlled TRD studies) and SUSTAIN-1 (relapse prevention study) were analyzed. Group differences for mean changes in PHQ-9 total score from baseline were compared using analysis of covariance. Associations between MADRS and PHQ-9 total scores from TRANSFORM-1/TRANSFORM-2 were assessed using simple parametric, nonparametric, and multiple regression models. RESULTS: In TRANSFORM-1/TRANSFORM-2 (ESK + OAD, n = 343; OAD + PBO, n = 222), baseline PHQ-9 mean scores were 20.4 for ESK + OAD and 20.6 for OAD + PBO (severe depression). At day 28, significant group differences were observed in least squares mean change (SE) in PHQ-9 scores from baseline (-12.8 [0.46] vs -10.3 [0.53], P < .001) and in clinically substantial change in PHQ-9 scores (≥6 points; 77.1% vs 64%, P < .001) in ESK + OAD and OAD + PBO groups, respectively. A nonlinear relationship between MADRS and PHQ-9 was observed; total scores demonstrated increased correlation over time. In SUSTAIN-1, 57.3% of patients receiving ESK + OAD (n = 89) versus 44.2% receiving OAD + PBO (n = 86) retained remission status (PHQ-9 score ≤4) at maintenance treatment end point (P = .044). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with TRD, ESK + OAD significantly improved severity of depressive symptoms, and more patients achieved clinically meaningful changes in depressive symptoms based on PHQ-9, versus OAD + PBO. PHQ-9 outcomes were consistent with those of clinician-rated MADRS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02417064, NCT02418585, NCT02493868.

Longitudinal Course of Adverse Events With Esketamine Nasal Spray: A Post Hoc Analysis of Pooled Data From Phase 3 Trials in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Depression.

Objective: To describe the tolerability of esketamine nasal spray based on the adverse event profile observed during treatment sessions occurring early and later over the course of treatment.Methods: In 2 long-term, phase 3 studies (NCT02493868, October 1, 2015-February 16, 2018; NCT02497287, September 30, 2015-October 28, 2017), patients with treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (per DSM-5) and nonresponse to ≥ 2 oral antidepressants received esketamine nasal spray (56 or 84 mg) twice weekly during a 4-week induction phase, weekly for weeks 5-8, and weekly or every 2 weeks thereafter as maintenance treatment, in conjunction with a new oral antidepressant. A post hoc analysis using descriptive statistics evaluated occurrence (incidence, frequency, severity) and recurrence (incidence and severity) of events of specific interest.Results: In patients treated with esketamine nasal spray plus a newly initiated oral antidepressant (n = 928), spontaneously reported adverse events of dizziness, nausea, sedation, vertigo, and increased blood pressure were more likely to recur after the first week of treatment if they occurred more frequently (twice > once > none) during the first week. The same pattern was observed when these events were assessed by structured instruments. Incidences of dizziness, dissociation, increased blood pressure, nausea, vertigo, and sedation were highest in week 1 of treatment (20.6%, 16.7%, 4.3%, 14.0%, 12.1%, and 3.8%, respectively) and decreased thereafter. Initial occurrences and subsequent recurrences of events were mostly mild or moderate in severity.Conclusions: Adverse events during treatment with esketamine nasal spray plus an oral antidepressant generally become less frequent with ongoing treatment, and the majority are mild or moderate in severity.Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02493868; NCT02497287.

Systematic literature review of schizophrenia clinical practice guidelines on acute and maintenance management with antipsychotics.

Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) translate evidence into recommendations to improve patient care and outcomes. To provide an overview of schizophrenia CPGs, we conducted a systematic literature review of English-language CPGs and synthesized current recommendations for the acute and maintenance management with antipsychotics. Searches for schizophrenia CPGs were conducted in MEDLINE/Embase from 1/1/2004-12/19/2019 and in guideline websites until 06/01/2020. Of 19 CPGs, 17 (89.5%) commented on first-episode schizophrenia (FES), with all recommending antipsychotic monotherapy, but without agreement on preferred antipsychotic. Of 18 CPGs commenting on maintenance therapy, 10 (55.6%) made no recommendations on the appropriate maximum duration of maintenance therapy, noting instead individualization of care. Eighteen (94.7%) CPGs commented on long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs), mainly in cases of nonadherence (77.8%), maintenance care (72.2%), or patient preference (66.7%), with 5 (27.8%) CPGs recommending LAIs for FES. For treatment-resistant schizophrenia, 15/15 CPGs recommended clozapine. Only 7/19 (38.8%) CPGs included a treatment algorithm.

Maintenance dose conversion between oral risperidone and paliperidone palmitate 1 month: Practical guidance based on pharmacokinetic simulations.

AIM: We assessed the dosage strengths of paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) long-acting injectable resulting in similar steady-state (SS) exposures to the dosage strengths of oral risperidone using pharmacokinetic (PK) simulations. METHODS: Population PK simulations of SS PK were performed using the PK models of oral risperidone and PP1M. The concentrations of active moiety (risperidone + paliperidone) from risperidone were compared to paliperidone concentrations resulting from PP1M administration. Similarity was assessed via graphical evaluation of median and 90% prediction intervals of SS PK profiles over 28 days. RESULTS: Oral risperidone doses of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6 mg/d are expected to result in similar SS PK as PP1M doses of 25, 50, 75, 100, and 150 mg eq. (which correspond to 39, 78, 117, 156, and 234 mg of paliperidone palmitate) respectively (ie 25-fold dose conversion factor from oral risperidone to PP1M). CONCLUSIONS: This study provides clinicians with a practical guidance to establish suitable maintenance dose levels of PP1M and oral risperidone when transitioning patients from one formulation to another.

Methodological challenges in indirect treatment comparisons: spotlight on a recent comparison of long-acting injectable aripiprazole versus paliperidone palmitate in the treatment of schizophrenia.

In a recent study, an indirect treatment comparison was performed to examine the relative efficacy and tolerability of aripiprazole once monthly and paliperidone palmitate once monthly. The authors concluded that the results may suggest relative advantages for aripiprazole once monthly over paliperidone palmitate once monthly in the short-term treatment of schizophrenia. However, the validity of the study is compromised as an indirect treatment comparison using extant data may violate important assumptions. Other methodological issues identified further highlight the challenges of performing indirect treatment comparisons.

An assessment of injection site reaction and injection site pain of 1-month and 3-month long-acting injectable formulations of paliperidone palmitate.

PURPOSE: To evaluate injection site reactions and pain following paliperidone palmitate 1-month (PP1M) and 3-month (PP3M) administration using safety data of double-blind (DB), noninferiority study. METHODS: Patients (n = 1,429) with schizophrenia, treated with PP1M (50-150 mg-eq, 17-week open-label [OL] phase) were randomized to PP1M or PP3M in 48-week DB phase. FINDINGS: PP1M and PP3M injections were well tolerated. Incidence of induration, redness, and swelling were low in both phases (OL: 9-12%; DB: 7-13%), and were mostly mild in both groups. Mean (SD) visual analog scale scores decreased from OL-baseline (22.0 [21.6]) to DB-baseline (19.5 [20.6] vs. 18.4 [20.4]) and DB-endpoint (15.6 [17.9] vs. 15.5 [18.3]). PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Injection site reactions and pain were low and similar between both treatments, regardless of administration site and dose.

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 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.

Expansion of guidance for the day 8 initiation dose of paliperidone palmitate to avoid a missed dose.

BACKGROUND: Paliperidone palmitate (PP) is a long-acting injectable formulation of an atypical antipsychotic, paliperidone. Its dose can be expressed in milligram or milligram equivalents (mg eq) of active paliperidone (39, 78, 117, 156, and 234 mg of PP correspond to 25, 50, 75, 100, and 150 mg eq of paliperidone). The recommended initiation dosing regimen for PP is 150 [day 1]/100[day 8] mg eq. Labeling guidance allowed a ± 2 day window for the day 8 injection that provides more flexibility with patient scheduling and avoids missing the day 8 initiation dose. Recently, expansion of the day 8 dosing window from ±2 to ±4 days has been approved in the United States based on results obtained from the model-based simulations and review of safety data presented here. METHODS: The predicted exposure for the recommended initiation regimen of PP was compared with day 1/day 4, and day 1/day 12 dosing scenarios; each scenario was compared with the highest clinically evaluated initiation regimen (150[day 1]/150[day 8] mg eq) and to the recommended 6 mg/day oral dose of extended-release paliperidone. RESULTS: Simulated exposures with PP 150 mg eq on day 1 and 100 mg eq on days 4, 8, or 12 overlap considerably, with ±3 ng/mL variation in median maximum plasma concentrations. Based upon pharmacokinetic bridging/bracketing, the peak concentration with PP 150/100 mg eq [days 1/4] was lower than that with the highest initiation regimen. Exposures for PP 150 mg eq on day 1 and 100 mg eq on days 4, 8, or 12 were maintained close to those of 6 mg of paliperidone extended-release. CONCLUSION: These simulations indicate that using the expanded dosing window of ±4 days has little effect on paliperidone exposure. A review of the overall pattern of treatment-emergent adverse events did not identify any new safety risks associated with the expanded dosing window.