Cariprazine Orodispersible Tablet: A New Formulation for Cariprazine.

INTRODUCTION: Cariprazine is an atypical dopamine receptor partial agonist antipsychotic available in the form of capsules. Although capsules are one of the most desirable routes of administration, there are certain situations (e. g., in an acute psychiatric setting, or when swallowing difficulties, or liquid shortages are present) when they cannot be administered. Therefore, alternative solutions like orodispersible tablets are needed. This study aimed to investigate the bioequivalence of a newly developed orodispersible tablet to the commercially available hard gelatine capsule of cariprazine 1.5 mg. METHODS: This was a phase I, open-label, randomized, single-dose bioequivalence study. It had a 2-period, 2-sequence, cross-over design, where each subject received one test and one reference product in a randomized sequence, separated by a wash-out period of 55 days. Blood sampling was performed over 72 h after dosing. Cariprazine concentrations were analyzed by a validated HPLC-MS/MS method. Standard bioequivalence statistics was applied to PK parameters calculated by non-compartmental analysis. Safety measures were analyzed descriptively. RESULT: Pharmacokinetic data of 43 healthy volunteers and safety data of 54 subjects was analyzed. Cariprazine AUC0-72h and Cmax geometric mean ratios were 117.76% and 100.88%, respectively. The 90% confidence intervals were within the pre-defined bioequivalence acceptance limits of 80.00% - 125.00%. Safety data was in line with the Summary of Product Characteristics of Cariprazine. DISCUSSION: The result of this clinical trial proved the bioequivalence of the new orodispersible tablet formulation when compared to hard gelatine capsules, enabling an alternative option for treatment of those suffering from schizophrenia.

Minimal Effects of Cariprazine on Prolactin Levels in Bipolar Disorder and Schizophrenia.

Background: Many medications used to treat schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder are linked to hyperprolactinemia. The effects of cariprazine, a dopamine D3/D2 receptor partial agonist, on prolactin levels in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder were evaluated. Methods: Effects on prolactin were evaluated using pooled data from randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with schizophrenia (4 studies; 6-week duration; cariprazine 1.5-3 mg/d, 4.5-6 mg/d, and 9-12 mg/d), bipolar mania (3 studies; 3-week duration; cariprazine 3-6 and 9-12 mg/d), and bipolar depression (3 studies; 6- to 8-week duration; cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d). Long-term effects were analyzed using open-label studies in patients with schizophrenia (2 studies; 48-week duration) and patients with bipolar mania (1 study; 16-week duration). Change in prolactin levels (ng/mL) from baseline to study endpoint was evaluated in subsets of sex and prior medication use. Results: In patients with schizophrenia (male, n = 1377; female, n = 558), median prolactin changes were -1.2 for males and -7.4 for females on placebo, and ranged from -4.2 to -3.6 for males and -12.4 to +0.2 for females in the cariprazine-treatment groups. In patients with bipolar mania (male, n = 570; female, n = 395), median prolactin changes were -0.2 for males and -1.1 for females on placebo and ranged from -2.1 to -3.0 for males and 0 to +1.8 for females in the cariprazine-treatment groups. Median decreases were also seen in the long-term studies of schizophrenia (range, -14.6 to -2.0) and bipolar mania (range, -0.8 to +1.9). In patients with bipolar depression (male, n = 485; female, n = 780), median prolactin changes were +0.3 for males and +0.7 for females on placebo and ranged from +0.4 to +0.5 for males and +3.0 to +3.1 for females in the cariprazine-treatment groups. Conclusion: Treatment with cariprazine for schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder was associated with minimal effects on prolactin levels.

Young stars and red giants: The moderating effect of age diversity on the relationship between the proportion of high performers and team performance.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the conditions under which high performers increase team performance. It is hypothesized that the proportion of high performers in a team increases team performance but only up to a certain point, after which the marginal benefit decreases. Moreover, this study also draws on recent research on the interplay between different types of status hierarchies to hypothesize that the negative effects on team performance of having too high a proportion of high performers are weaker in teams where there is greater age diversity among the high performers and stronger in those where there is less age diversity. These hypotheses are tested by analyzing panel data on National Basketball Association (NBA) teams and the analyses provide support for both hypotheses. The study's most important contribution is that it sheds light on how the interplay between multiple status hierarchies may facilitate collaboration between high performers in teams and organizations, allowing them to exhibit very high performance. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

Disentangling the symptoms of schizophrenia: Network analysis in acute phase patients and in patients with predominant negative symptoms.

BACKGROUND: The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) is widely used in schizophrenia and has been divided into distinct factors (5-factor models) and subfactors. Network analyses are newer in psychiatry and can help to better understand the relationships and interactions between the symptoms of a psychiatric disorder. The aim of this study was threefold: (a) to evaluate connections between schizophrenia symptoms in two populations of patients (patients in the acutely exacerbated phase of schizophrenia and patients with predominant negative symptoms [PNS]), (b) to test whether network analyses support the Mohr 5 factor model of the PANSS and the Kahn 2 factor model of negative symptoms, and finally (c) to identify the most central symptoms in the two populations. METHODS: Using pooled baseline data from four cariprazine clinical trials in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia (n = 2193) and the cariprazine-risperidone study in patients with PNS (n = 460), separate network analyses were performed. Network structures were estimated for all 30 items of the PANSS. RESULTS: While negative symptoms in patients with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia are correlated with other PANSS symptoms, these negative symptoms are not correlated with other PANSS symptoms in patients with PNS. The Mohr factors were partially reflected in the network analyses. The two most central symptoms (largest node strength) were delusions and uncooperativeness in acute phase patients and hostility and delusions in patients with PNS. CONCLUSIONS: This network analysis suggests that symptoms of schizophrenia are differently structured in acute and PNS patients. While in the former, negative symptoms are mainly secondary, in patients with PNS, they are mainly primary. Further, primary negative symptoms are better conceptualized as distinct negative symptom dimensions of the PANSS.

Safety and Tolerability of Cariprazine in Patients with Schizophrenia: A Pooled Analysis of Eight Phase II/III Studies.

BACKGROUND: Long-term treatment with antipsychotic agents is indicated for patients with schizophrenia, but treatment is associated with adverse events (AEs) that contribute to medication discontinuation and nonadherence. Understanding drug safety profiles is critical to avoid unwanted side effects. Cariprazine is a potent dopamine D3/D2 receptor partial agonist that is approved for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia (EU, US) and acute manic/mixed and depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder (US). METHODS: Post hoc analyses were conducted to characterize the safety profile of cariprazine within the recommended 1.5-6 mg/d dose range for schizophrenia; data from 8 short- or long-term clinical trials were analyzed. RESULTS: In the pooled cariprazine-treated safety population (n=2048), the rate of study completion was 52.8%, with withdrawal of consent, insufficient response, and AEs the most common reasons for premature discontinuation. The most commonly reported AEs (>10%) in the overall cariprazine-treatment group were akathisia (14.6%), insomnia (14.0%), and headache (12.1%); most AEs were considered mild (71.0%) or moderate (26.5%). Most akathisia was mild/moderate (97.5%) and >93% of patients remained on treatment; akathisia events were managed by rescue medications (56.3%) or dose reduction (18.3%). The metabolic profile of cariprazine was neutral in patients with short- and long-term exposure; mean weight gain was 1 kg for overall cariprazine, with an AE of weight increased reported for 5.1%. Other AEs of special interest that occurred at >3% for overall cariprazine were extrapyramidal disorder (7.0%), sedation (3.7%), and somnolence (3.1%); prolactin elevation, cognition impairment, sexual dysfunction, suicidality, and QT prolongation occurred at ≤1%. CONCLUSION: Akathisia, the most common cariprazine-related AE, was mild/moderate and resulted in few study discontinuations; symptoms were well managed and most patients remained on treatment. Results of this analysis indicated that cariprazine in the recommended dose range was safe and generally well tolerated in patients with schizophrenia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Studies registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00404573, NCT01104779, NCT00694707, NCT01104766, NCT01104792, NCT00839852, and NCT01412060) and EudraCT (2012-005485-36).

Cariprazine Safety in Adolescents and the Elderly: Analyses of Clinical Study Data.

Schizophrenia is a life-long mental disorder, affecting young adolescents to elderly patients. Antipsychotic treatment is indicated for all patients with schizophrenia, including the very young and old as well. Developmental issues in the young and decline in organ functioning in the elderly could influence reactions to the drug, and require different dosing regimens. The aim of the present article was to examine the safety profile and dosing requirements in adolescent (13 to less than 18) and elderly (65 and above) patients treated with cariprazine. Data from two clinical studies (one pharmacokinetic pediatric study and one phase III clinical trial) on 49 adolescent patients and 17 elderly patients (65 years of age or above) treated with cariprazine was examined. Safety measures included assessment of adverse events (AEs), clinical laboratory values, physical examinations, extrapyramidal symptom (EPS)-, depression-, and suicidality rating scales. Safety parameters were summarized using descriptive statistics. Results indicate that cariprazine was generally safe and well tolerated. Adverse events in the marginal age populations were comparable to the adult population, except for less insomnia in the young and no reports of akathisia in the elderly. Laboratory parameters, vital sign values and EEG parameters were comparable to previously published data in the adult population. In conclusion, cariprazine in the approved adult dose-range of 1.5-6 mg might be a safe treatment option also in adolescent and elderly patients with schizophrenia. Further studies are need to verify these preliminary findings.

Linking PANSS negative symptom scores with the Clinical Global Impressions Scale: understanding negative symptom scores in schizophrenia.

Understanding how rating scale improvement corresponds to a clinical impression in patients with negative symptoms of schizophrenia may help define the clinical relevance of change in this patient population. We conducted post hoc equipercentile linking analyses of Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) outcomes (e.g., PANSS-Factor Score for Negative Symptoms [FSNS]) with Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) and -Severity (CGI-S) ratings on data from patients treated with cariprazine (n = 227) or risperidone (n = 229) in a clinical study evaluating negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Patients were prospectively selected for persistent, predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia (PNS), and minimal positive/depressive/extrapyramidal symptoms. Linking results demonstrated that greater improvement on PANSS-derived measures corresponded to clinical impressions of greater improvement, as measured by the CGI-I, and less severe disease states, as measured by the CGI-S. For example, CGI-S scores of 1 (normal), 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6 (severely ill) corresponded to PANSS-FSNS scores of 7, 13, 19, 24, 29, and 35, respectively. Likewise, CGI-I scores of minimally improved, much improved, and very much improved corresponded to a change from baseline in PANSS-FSNS scores of -27%, -49%, and -100%, respectively. These are important findings for the interpretation of the results of trials in patients with persistent negative symptoms.

Cariprazine Treatment of Bipolar Depression: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Study.

OBJECTIVE: Cariprazine, a dopamine D3/D2 and 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, was found to be effective in treating bipolar I depression in a previous phase 2 study. This phase 3 study further assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine in bipolar I depression. METHODS: In a double-blind placebo-controlled study, adult participants (18-65 years old) who met DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder and a current depressive episode were randomly assigned to receive placebo (N=158) or cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day (N=157) or 3.0 mg/day (N=165). The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were changes from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score, respectively. Least squares mean differences were estimated using a mixed model for repeated measures, and p values were adjusted for multiplicity. RESULTS: Both dosages of cariprazine were significantly more effective than placebo in improving depressive symptoms (reducing MADRS total score); the least squares mean differences were -2.5 (95% CI=-4.6, -0.4) for cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day and -3.0 (95% CI=-5.1, -0.9) for cariprazine at 3.0 mg/day. Both cariprazine dosages were associated with lower CGI-S scores compared with placebo, but the differences did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for multiplicity (least squares mean difference, -0.2 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 1.5 mg/day group and -0.3 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 3.0 mg/day group). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (in at least 5% of participants in either cariprazine treatment group and twice the rate of the placebo group) were nausea, akathisia, dizziness, and sedation. Mean changes in weight and metabolic parameters were relatively small and comparable across groups. CONCLUSIONS: Cariprazine, at both 1.5 mg/day and 3.0 mg/day, was effective, generally well tolerated, and relatively safe in reducing depressive symptoms in adults with bipolar I depression.

The efficacy of cariprazine in negative symptoms of schizophrenia: Post hoc analyses of PANSS individual items and PANSS-derived factors.

BACKGROUND: Negative symptoms in schizophrenia are heterogeneous and multidimensional; effective treatments are lacking. Cariprazine, a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 receptor partial agonist and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, was significantly more effective than risperidone in treating negative symptoms in a prospectively designed trial in patients with schizophrenia and persistent, predominant negative symptoms. METHODS: Using post hoc analyses, we evaluated change from baseline at week 26 in individual items of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and PANSS-derived factor models using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population (cariprazine = 227; risperidone = 227). RESULTS: Change from baseline was significantly different in favor of cariprazine versus risperidone on PANSS items N1-N5 (blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive/apathetic social withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking) (P < .05), but not on N6 (lack of spontaneity/flow of conversation) or N7 (stereotyped thinking). On all PANSS-derived negative symptom factor models evaluated (PANSS-Factor Score for Negative Symptoms, Liemburg factors, Khan factors, Pentagonal Structure Model Negative Symptom factor), statistically significant improvement was demonstrated for cariprazine versus risperidone (P < .01). Small and similar changes in positive/depressive/EPS symptoms suggested that negative symptom improvement was not pseudospecific. Change from baseline was significantly different for cariprazine versus risperidone on PANSS-based factors evaluating other relevant symptom domains (disorganized thoughts, prosocial function, cognition; P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Since items representing different negative symptom dimensions may represent different fundamental pathophysiological mechanisms, significant improvement versus risperidone on most PANSS Negative Subscale items and across all PANSS-derived factors suggests broad-spectrum efficacy for cariprazine in treating negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

Long-Term Remission With Cariprazine Treatment in Patients With Schizophrenia: A Post Hoc Analysis of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Relapse Prevention Trial.

BACKGROUND: Long-term remission is an important treatment goal in schizophrenia. Cariprazine, a dopamine D3/D2 receptor and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, is approved in the United States and Europe to treat adults with schizophrenia. METHODS: Post hoc analyses of data from a long-term cariprazine relapse prevention study (NCT01412060; September 27, 2011-September 3, 2014) investigated the efficacy of cariprazine for maintaining remission in clinically stable patients with DSM-IV-TR-defined schizophrenia. Patients were stabilized with open-label cariprazine (20 weeks), then randomized 1:1 to cariprazine (3, 6, or 9 mg/d) or placebo for double-blind treatment (up to 72 weeks). Symptomatic remission was defined as scores ≤ 3 on 8 items from the General, Positive, and Negative Symptoms subscales of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). Sustained remission included meeting remission criteria at the current and all prior double-blind visits or for ≥ 6 consecutive months. RESULTS: At randomization, 169/200 patients (84.5%) met symptomatic remission criteria. During double-blind treatment, time to loss of sustained remission was significantly longer (P = .0020) for cariprazine versus placebo (hazard ratio = 0.51); 60.5% of cariprazine-treated and 34.9% of placebo-treated patients sustained remission through the final visit (odds ratio [OR] = 2.85; P = .0012; number needed to treat [NNT] = 4). Almost twice as many cariprazine-treated (39.6%) as placebo-treated (21.2%) patients met symptomatic remission criteria at all visits ≥ 6 consecutive months immediately before/including the final double-blind visit (OR = 2.44; P = .0057; NNT = 6). More cariprazine-treated (41.6%) than placebo-treated (27.3%) patients sustained remission for any ≥ 6 consecutive month period (OR = 1.90, P = .0379; NNT = 7). CONCLUSIONS: Cariprazine was associated with significantly longer sustained remission, higher remission rates, and increased likelihood of sustaining remission for ≥ 6 consecutive months versus placebo. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01412060.

The Panomics Approach in Neurodegenerative Disorders.

BACKGROUND: The molecular genetic technologies revolutionized the diagnostics of many disorders. Thanks to the new molecular techniques and the rapid improvement of the information technologies the number of mendelien inherited disorders has increased rapidly in the last five years. The omics era brought radical changes in the understanding of complex disorders and the underlying pathomechanisms. However, in most complex disorders the genome wide association studies could not clarify the genetic background even for disorders where a very strong heritability had been observed. OBJECTIVE: In this paper the changing concept of the neurodegenerative disorders is discussed. The traditional classification of these disorders was purely based on clinical symptoms and morphological signs in the last century. Identifying the signature lesions of various neurodegenerative disorders may reveal a common pathological pathway in these disorders. New neuroimaging methods provided additional tools to assess pathological pathways in vivo already in the early stages of the diseases. Visualizing in vivo amyloid deposits and neuroinflammation improved our understanding of their role in various neurodegenerative disorders. Genetics may be the most precise way to identify the background of these disorders. However, there is only limited number of cases where true association can be proved between the disorder and the genetic mutations. Most of the neurodegenerative disorders seem to be multifactorial and cannot be traced back to one single cause. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, shifting from a classification based on symptomatology only to a modern multidisciplinary approach, based on the constantly evolving panomics findings, would improve our understanding of neurodegenerative diseases and could be the basis of novel therapeutic research.

Efficacy of cariprazine on negative symptoms in patients with acute schizophrenia: A post hoc analysis of pooled data.

Although currently approved antipsychotics exert efficacy on positive symptoms of schizophrenia, treatments for negative symptoms remain a major unmet need. Post hoc analyses were used to investigate the possible efficacy of cariprazine in patients with moderate/severe negative symptoms of schizophrenia and no predominance of positive symptoms. Data were pooled from 2 randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled cariprazine studies in patients with acute schizophrenia (NCT00694707, NCT01104766). Analyses included data from a subset of patients with a Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factor score for negative symptoms (PANSS-FSNS) ≥24, PANSS factor score for positive symptoms (PANSS-FSPS) ≤19, and scores of ≥4 on ≥2 of 3 PANSS items (blunted affect [N1], passive/apathetic social withdrawal [N4], lack of spontaneity/flow of conversation [N6]). Changes from baseline to week 6 in PANSS-FSNS were evaluated in the following treatment groups: placebo (n = 79), cariprazine 1.5-3 (n = 94) and 4.5-6 mg/d (n = 66), risperidone 4 mg/d (n = 34), or aripiprazole 10 mg/d (n = 44). Significant differences were observed versus placebo for cariprazine (1.5-3 mg/d, P = .0179; 4.5-6 mg/d, P = .0002) and risperidone (P = .0149), but not aripiprazole (P = .3265), and versus aripiprazole for cariprazine 4.5-6 mg/d (P = .0197). After adjusting for positive symptom changes, differences versus placebo remained statistically significant for cariprazine (1.5-3 mg/d, P = .0322; 4.5-6 mg/d, P = .0038) but not for risperidone (P = .2204). PANSS-FSNS response (≥20% reduction from baseline) rates were significantly higher with cariprazine (1.5-3 mg/d = 54.3%, P = .0194; 4.5-6 mg/d = 69.7%, P = .0001) than placebo (35.4%). In patients with acute schizophrenia and moderate/severe negative symptoms, cariprazine was associated with significantly greater improvement in negative symptoms compared with placebo and aripiprazole, warranting further exploration of the efficacy of cariprazine on negative symptoms.

Cariprazine versus risperidone monotherapy for treatment of predominant negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia: a randomised, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia can be severe enough to cause persistent impairment, effective treatment options are lacking. We aimed to assess the new generation antipsychotic cariprazine in adult patients with predominant negative symptoms. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, phase 3b trial, we enrolled adults aged 18-65 years with long-term (>2 year), stable schizophrenia and predominant negative symptoms (>6 months) at 66 study centres (mainly hospitals and university clinics, with a small number of private practices) in 11 European countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web response system to 26 weeks of monotherapy with fixed-dose oral cariprazine (3 mg, 4·5 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day) or risperidone (3 mg, 4 mg [target dose], or 6 mg per day); previous medication was discontinued over 2 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 26 or end of treatment on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale factor score for negative symptoms (PANSS-FSNS) analysed in a modified intention-to-treat population of patients who had follow-up assessments within 5 days after last receipt of study drugs with a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This study is registered with EudraCT, number 2012-005485-36. FINDINGS: Between May 27, 2013, and Nov 17, 2014, 533 patients were screened and 461 (86%) patients were randomised to treatment (230 for cariprazine and 231 for risperidone); 460 were included in the safety population (one patient discontinued before study drug intake). 227 (99%) of 230 patients in the cariprazine group and 229 (99%) of 230 patients in the risperidone group were included in the modified intention-to-treat population (178 [77%] in each group completed 26 weeks of treatment). Mean daily doses were 4·2 mg (SD 0·6) for cariprazine and 3·8 mg (0·4) for risperidone. Treatment-emergent adverse events (eg, insomnia, akathisia, worsening of schizophrenia, headache, anxiety) were reported in 123 (54%) patients treated with cariprazine and 131 (57%) patients treated with risperidone. Use of cariprazine led to a greater least squares mean change in PANSS-FSNS from baseline to week 26 than did risperidone (-8·90 points for cariprazine vs -7·44 points for risperidone; least squares mean difference -1·46, 95% CI -2·39 to -0·53; p=0·0022; effect size 0·31). One patient in the risperidone group died of a cause regarded as unrelated to treatment. INTERPRETATION: Our results support the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of predominant negative symptoms of schizophrenia. FUNDING: Gedeon Richter Plc.