Conceptual framework for outcomes research studies of hepatitis C: an analytical review.

Hepatitis C virus infection is one of the main causes of chronic liver disease worldwide. Until recently, the standard antiviral regimen for hepatitis C was a combination of an interferon derivative and ribavirin, but a plethora of new antiviral drugs is becoming available. While these new drugs have shown great efficacy in clinical trials, observational studies are needed to determine their effectiveness in clinical practice. Previous observational studies have shown that multiple factors, besides the drug regimen, affect patient outcomes in clinical practice. Here, we provide an analytical review of published outcomes studies of the management of hepatitis C virus infection. A conceptual framework defines the relationships between four categories of variables: health care system structure, patient characteristics, process-of-care, and patient outcomes. This framework can provide a starting point for outcomes studies addressing the use and effectiveness of new antiviral drug treatments.

Use of a relapse monitoring board: an independent assessment for determining relapse in clinical trials for bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Independent review boards can provide an objective appraisal of investigators' decisions and may be useful for determining complex primary outcomes, such as bipolar disorder relapse, in crossnational studies. This article describes the use of an independent, blinded relapse monitoring board to assess the primary outcome (relapse) in an international clinical trial of risperidone long-acting therapy adjunctive to standard-care pharmacotherapy for patients with bipolar disorder. DESIGN: The fully autonomous relapse monitoring board was composed of a chair and two additional members-all psychiatrists and experts in the diagnostic, clinical, and therapeutic management of bipolar disorder. The relapse monitoring board met six times during the study to review patient relapse data and was charged with the responsibility of determining if the events described by investigators qualified as relapses. Additionally, the relapse monitoring board reviewed data for all randomized patients to identify any relapse events not recognized by investigators. RESULTS: Primary efficacy results were similar and significant for investigator- and relapse monitoring board-determined relapses. Ten discrepancies were noted: two of the 42 investigator-determined relapses did not meet the intended clinical relapse threshold as determined by the relapse monitoring board; conversely, the relapse monitoring board confirmed eight relapse events not identified by investigators. The relapse monitoring board had no direct interactions with patients and had to rely on the accuracy of investigator assessments. Also, once an investigator determined a relapse and the patients discontinued the study, less information was available to the relapse monitoring board for relapse assessment. CONCLUSIONS: Use of the relapse monitoring board supported the validity of the study by incorporating a level of standardization to mitigate the risk that local practice in different cultures and medical systems at the sites would confound study results.

Adjunctive long-acting risperidone in patients with bipolar disorder who relapse frequently and have active mood symptoms.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this exploratory analysis was to characterize efficacy and onset of action of a 3-month treatment period with risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI), adjunctive to an individual's treatment regimen, in subjects with symptomatic bipolar disorder who relapsed frequently and had significant symptoms of mania and/or depression. METHODS: Subjects with bipolar disorder with ≥4 mood episodes in the past 12 months entered the open-label stabilization phase preceding a placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Subjects with significant depressive or manic/mixed symptoms at baseline were analyzed. Significant depressive symptoms were defined as Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) ≥16 and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) < 16; manic/mixed symptoms were YMRS ≥16 with any MADRS score. Subjects received open-label RLAI (25-50 mg every 2 weeks) for 16 weeks, adjunctive to a subject's individualized treatment for bipolar disorder (mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and/or anxiolytics). Clinical status was evaluated with the Clinical Global Impressions of Bipolar Disorder-Severity (CGI-BP-S) scale and changes on the MADRS and YMRS scales. Within-group changes were evaluated using paired t tests; categorical differences were assessed using Fisher exact test. No adjustment was made for multiplicity. RESULTS: 162 subjects who relapsed frequently met criteria for significant mood symptoms at open-label baseline; 59/162 (36.4%) had depressive symptoms, 103/162 (63.6%) had manic/mixed symptoms. Most subjects (89.5%) were receiving ≥1 medication for bipolar disorder before enrollment. Significant improvements were observed for the total population on the CGI-BP-S, MADRS, and YMRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). Eighty-two (53.3%) subjects achieved remission at the week 16 LOCF end point. The subpopulation with depressive symptoms at open-label baseline experienced significant improvement on the CGI-BP-S and MADRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). Subjects with manic/mixed symptoms at baseline had significant improvements on the CGI-BP-S and YMRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). No unexpected tolerability findings were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Exploratory analysis of changes in overall clinical status and depression/mania symptoms in subjects with symptomatic bipolar disorder who relapse frequently showed improvements in each of these areas after treatment with RLAI, adjunctive to a subject's individualized treatment. Prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.

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.

Clinical characteristics and resource utilization of patients with bipolar disorder who have frequent psychiatric interventions.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the demographics, clinical characteristics and resource utilization of patients with bipolar disorder who required frequent psychiatric interventions (FPIs) with those needing fewer interventions in the Duke Healthcare System database between 1999 and 2005. METHODS: This retrospective analysis was conducted using electronic medical records of bipolar patients with FPIs, defined as having ≥4 clinically significant events (CSEs) in any 12-month period while in the Duke University Healthcare System. CSEs were composed of emergency room visits, inpatient hospitalizations, or a change in psychotropic medication due to psychiatric symptoms (score≥4 on the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scale). Data were compared between patients with and without FPIs. RESULTS: Of 632 patients with bipolar disorder 52.5% were identified as having FPIs. These patients were younger and more often female and African American than those with fewer interventions (p<0.01 for all). Patients with FPIs were generally prescribed more psychotropic and non-psychotropic medications, utilized more healthcare resources and experienced more psychiatric co-morbidities than those who did not require FPIs (p<0.01 for all). LIMITATIONS: These results are from a single healthcare system and may not be generalizable to all patients with bipolar disorder. This analysis was retrospective and relied on availability of adequate information recording and coding of diagnoses by physicians. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with bipolar disorder who required FPIs were significantly different from those with fewer clinically defined interventions with respect to their demographic and clinical characteristics and prescribed medications.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of maintenance treatment with adjunctive risperidone long-acting therapy in patients with bipolar I disorder who relapse frequently.

OBJECTIVE: No large controlled trials have evaluated adjunctive maintenance treatment with long-acting injectable antipsychotics in patients with bipolar disorder. This study assessed whether adjunctive maintenance treatment with risperidone long-acting therapy (RLAT), added to treatment-as-usual (TAU) medications for bipolar disorder, delays relapse in patients with bipolar disorder type I. METHODS: This study included patients with bipolar disorder type I with > or = four mood episodes in the 12 months prior to study entry. Following a 16-week, open-label stabilization phase with RLAT plus TAU, remitted patients entered a 52-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, relapse-prevention phase. Randomized patients continued treatment with adjunctive RLAT (25-50 mg every two weeks) plus TAU (n = 65) or switched to adjunctive placebo injection plus TAU (n = 59). The primary outcome measure was time to relapse to any mood episode. RESULTS: Of 240 enrolled patients, 124 entered double-blind treatment. Time to relapse was longer in patients receiving adjunctive RLAT (p = 0.010). Relapse rates were 23.1% (n = 15) with adjunctive RLAT versus 45.8% (n = 27) with adjunctive placebo; relative relapse risk was 2.3-fold higher with adjunctive placebo (p = 0.011). Completion rates were: adjunctive RLAT, 60.0% (n = 39) and adjunctive placebo, 42.4% (n = 25; p = 0.050). Adverse event (AE)-related discontinuations were 4.6% (n = 3) and 1.7% (n = 1), respectively. Common AEs (adjunctive RLAT versus adjunctive placebo) were: tremor (24.6% versus 10.2%), insomnia (20.0% versus 18.6%), muscle rigidity (12.3% versus 5.1%), weight increased (6.2% versus 1.7%), and hypokinesia (7.7% versus 0.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive RLAT significantly delayed time to relapse in patients with bipolar disorder type I who relapse frequently. Safety and tolerability of RLAT were generally consistent with that previously observed.