Comparison of Efficacy and Safety between Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Monotherapy and Combination of Long-Acting Injectable and Oral Antipsychotics in Patients with Schizophrenia

Background. Long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics are used as a monotherapy in patients with schizophrenia. However, the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics is commonly used in clinical practice, despite there being very limited studies investigating the efficacy and safety of this combination compared with LAI antipsychotic monotherapy. Objective. To study the efficacy and safety of LAI antipsychotic monotherapy compared with the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. Methods. This study was a retrospective cohort study, which classified eligible patients into two groups: the LAI antipsychotic monotherapy group and the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotic group. The primary outcome was hospitalization between groups. The duration of the study was 2 years. Results. In total, 86 patients completed the study and were analysed (LAI antipsychotic monotherapy group: n = 25 ; combination of LAI and oral antipsychotic group: n = 61 ). There was no significant difference in hospitalization between the two groups ( P = 1.000 ). For other outcomes, there were also no significant differences in both all-cause discontinuation ( P = 0.667 ) and adverse drug reactions ( P = 0.732 ) between the two groups. Conclusion. The efficacy and safety of LAI antipsychotic monotherapy appeared similar to the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia. Therefore, the combination of LAI and oral antipsychotics, which is commonly used in clinical practice, may not be necessary.

Evaluation of the effectiveness and acceptability of the long-acting oral antipsychotic penfluridol: Illustrative case series

Aim: In this study, we sought to determine clinical outcomes at 1 year for patients prescribed penfluridol in an inner London National Health Service Trust. Using noninterventional data, we describe the use, effectiveness and safety of this treatment modality. Results: We retrospectively followed up 17 patients prescribed penfluridol as part of routine clinical practice. All patients took penfluridol once weekly. Of these patients, 12 (70.6%) were considered treatment resistant. The average duration of illness for this cohort was 10 years (SD = 6.7). At 1 year, nine (53%) patients remained on treatment. Median survival time was not reached at 1-year follow-up; mean time on penfluridol was 251 days (95% confidence interval (CI), 184–318). The mean number of admissions to hospital in the year following penfluridol initiation was 0.6 compared with 0.8, 1 year before initiation ( p = 0.465). The median number of bed days 1 year before penfluridol initiation was 24, whereas in the year following penfluridol initiation, it was 0 ( p = 0.514). Clinical Implications: Although penfluridol is unlicensed in the United Kingdom, limited data suggest that this long-acting oral therapy has the potential to be used safely and effectively for the treatment of psychotic disorders. However, more data are required to establish the place of penfluridol and other potential long-acting oral antipsychotic formulations in the treatment of psychotic disorders.

The Clinical Use of Antipsychotic Plasma Levels

Clinicians recognize that monitoring psychotropic levels provides invaluable information to optimize therapy and track treatment adherence, but they lack formal training specifically focused on the use of plasma antipsychotic levels for these purposes. As new technologies emerge to rapidly provide these results, the opportunity to integrate this information into clinical care will grow. This practical handbook clarifies confusing concepts in the literature on use of antipsychotic levels, providing clear explanations for the logic underlying clinically relevant concepts such as the therapeutic threshold and the point of futility, and how these apply to individual antipsychotics. It offers accessible information on the expected correlation between dosages and trough levels, and also provides a clear explanation of how to use antipsychotic levels for monitoring oral antipsychotic adherence, and methods to help clinicians differentiate between poor adherence and variations in drug metabolism. An essential resource for psychiatrists, psychiatric nurse practitioners, and mental health professionals worldwide.

Reducing high dose antipsychotic therapy (HDAT) in a community mental health team (CMHT)

AimsThe consensus statement (CR190) of The Royal College of Psychiatrists states that the benefit of prescribing HDAT does not outweigh the risk of the increased side effect burden. HDAT is defined as the “daily dose of a single antipsychotic exceeding the upper limit for that drug as stated in the Summary of Product Characteristic (SPC) or British National Formulary (BNF),” and as the cumulative daily dose of two or more antipsychotics (for combined prescription). The prevalence of HDAT has been shown to vary widely and protocols for monitoring poorly implemented. In 2018 we completed a baseline survey of the prevalence of HDAT within our CMHT. We assessed our prescribing practice as compared to seven best practice audit criteria, which were adopted. Our aim is to resurvey closing the audit loop to 1) establish the current prevalence of HDAT and 2) assess the impact the intervention on prescribing practice.MethodMulti-disciplinary case notes for all registered patients were studied. A database was created including sociodemographic details, chart diagnosis, and medication. The proportion of patients prescribed antipsychotic medication was identified. The dose of each medication was converted into a percentage of BNF maximum recommended dose for that drug. For combined antipsychotic prescription, the cumulative dose was obtained adding the single percentages together. Exceeding 100% was regarded as HDAT. All HDAT patients were assessed against identified audit criteria as outlined by the Humber NHS Foundation Trust.ResultOf a total of 246 patients, 177 (72%) were prescribed antipsychotic medication. Of these, 14 (8%) were in receipt of HDAT. This compared to 68% prescribed antipsychotics and 9% in receipt of HDAT in the baseline audit. The average cumulative dose for every category (oral medication, depot and both) was calculated with a range from 1% to 168% (mean = 70%) for oral antipsychotic (single/combined), 1% to 193% (mean = 50%) for depots and 20% to 257% (mean = 95%) for combination of oral and depot. This compares with ranges of 1.6% to 215% (mean = 44.3%) for oral antipsychotic (single/combined), 0.04% to 100% (mean = 25.8%) for depots and 21% to 425% (mean = 119.6%) for combination of oral and depot in the baseline audit. Similar to the baseline survey no patient met all seven audit criteria but there was better adherence overall with best practice guidance. Blood and ECG monitoring were the most consistent parameters measured.ConclusionLower HDAT was achieved post intervention. Results, whilst positive, indicate the need for ongoing audit to maintain best standards.

Schizophrenia Long-Acting Injectable Antipsychotic Initiation Index: A Clinician Rated Instrument for Improving Treatment in Schizophrenia

Background: Schizophrenia is a severe psychiatric condition with devastating consequences for the individual's functionality and leading to severe disability. Lack of insight and non-adherence to treatment remain the most important factors in the progression of the disease to chronicity.Despite their proven effectiveness in preventing relapses, reducing morbidity and mortality, long acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) are still underused. One of the causes invoked is the lack of guidelines or protocols for initiating LAIs.Objective: The aim of this article is to present Schizophrenia long-acting injectable antipsychotic initiation index (SLAII), a clinician-rated index that rates the important factors of the disorder across seven items: age, duration of illness, relapses, antipsychotic treatment response, family support, antipsychotic existing formulation and adherence.Method: A retrospective study in which all patients with schizophrenia discharged on oral antipsychotics without LAIs treatment lifetime were evaluated with SLAII for opportunity for LAIs initiation.Results: Of 225 consecutive patients, 144 patients (64%) had a strong indication for initiating LAI and 76 (34%) had moderate indication. 203 patients (90.2 %) had more than 2 relapses. The results of our research showed that 177 patients (78.7%) received at discharge an oral antipsychotic that also had a long-acting formula.Conclusion: This paper proposed an instrument designed to improve treatment in schizophrenia using a simple conceptual model which integrates important predictors of good or poor outcomes.

Analysis of Treatment Goals for Patients with Schizophrenia: A US Survey of Psychiatrists, Patients with SCZ and Caregivers

ObjectivesObjectives for this survey are to determine similarities or differences in treatment goals reported by psychiatrists, patients with schizophrenia (SCZ) and caregivers in the US, as well as whether goals differed by patients currently on an oral antipsychotic (OAP) or long-acting injectable (LAI), and whether goals differed by age.MethodsThis was a real-world, cross-sectional survey of US psychiatrists, patients =18 years old diagnosed with SCZ, and caregivers. Data was collected using the Disease Specific Programme (DSP) methodology. Psychiatrists (n=120) completed detailed record forms for next 8 outpatients and 2 inpatients matching inclusion criteria. The same patients and their caregivers, if present, were invited by their psychiatrist to voluntarily complete a separate survey.ResultsResponses on treatment goals were collected from psychiatrists for all patients included in the analysis (n=1161), patients (n= 542) and caregivers (n=130). Among 3 top goals, psychiatrists, patients and caregivers concurred that “decrease in disease symptoms” is most important (63%, 64%, 68% respectively). For psychiatrists and caregivers, second was “decrease in hospitalization for relapse” (41%, and 38% respectively), whereas for patients, it was “thinking clearly” (47%). Of the 3 least important goals, psychiatrists, patients and caregivers agreed with “sexual problems” (59%, 43%, 44%, respectively) and “weight gain” (38%, 44%, 38%, respectively).When asked which goals were met by current medication, patients responded “decrease in disease symptoms” (68%) and “thinking clearly” (39%). However, caregivers responded “thinking clearly” (30%) was not met by current medication. Caregivers most important goals, “decrease in disease symptom” (70%) and “decrease in hospitalization for relapse” (41%), were met. Additional analyses of patients on OAPs and LAIs, did not show differences in goals. However, “decrease in disease symptoms” was numerically more important for patients on LAIs vs OAPs according to psychiatrists (68% vs 62%) and caregivers (77% vs 70% respectively). Caregivers responded “decrease in hospitalization for relapse” was met for 63% patients currently on an LAI and 35% OAP. No major differences in treatment goals were observed by patient age (18–35 vs 36–65 vs >65 years).DiscussionThere is consensus among US psychiatrists, patients and caregivers on the most important treatment goal “decrease in disease symptoms”, regardless of patients’ current medication or age. For patients, “thinking more clearly” was second, compared with “decrease in hospitalization due to relapse”, for psychiatrists and caregivers. All agreed that least important treatment goals, related to AEs, were “weight gain” and “sexual problems”. More caregivers agreed “decrease in hospitalization for relapse” was met by patients on LAIs vs OAPs. These findings may help with discussions between psychiatrists, patients and caregivers.FundingLundbeck LLC and Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc.