Relapse Prevention Study Research Articles

Implementation of a crisis resolution team service improvement programme: a qualitative study of the critical ingredients for success

BackgroundCrisis Resolution Teams (CRTs) offer home-based care for people in mental health crisis, as an alternative to hospital admission. The success of CRTs in England has been variable. In response to this, the CRT Optimization and RElapse prevention (CORE) study developed and trialled a 12-month Service Improvement Programme (SIP) based on a fidelity model. This paper describes a qualitative evaluation of the perspectives of CRT staff, managers, and programme facilitators. We identify barriers and facilitators to implementation, and mechanisms by which service improvements took place.MethodsManagers and staff from six purposively sampled CRTs were interviewed, as well as six facilitators who were employed to support the implementation of service improvement plans. Semi-structured focus groups and individual interviews were conducted and analysed using thematic analysis.FindingsA majority of participants viewed all components of the SIP as helpful in improving practice, although online resources were under-used. Perceived barriers to implementation centred principally around lack of staff time and ownership. Support from both senior staff and facilitators was essential in enabling teams to undertake the work associated with the SIP. All participating stakeholder groups reported that using the fidelity model to benchmark their CRT work to best practice and feel part of a ‘bigger whole’ was valuable.ConclusionCRT staff, managers and programme facilitators thought that a structured service improvement programme helped to increase fidelity to a best practice model. Flexibility (from all stakeholders) was key to enable service improvement actions to be manageable within time- and resource-poor teams.

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.

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). 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. 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). 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. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02417064, NCT02418585, NCT02493868.

Internet-based cognitive behaviour therapy for the prevention, treatment and relapse prevention of eating disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Eating disorders (EDs) are undertreated worldwide. In the UK the lag between recognition of symptoms and treatment ranges from about 15 months to in excess of 2 years. Internet-based cognitive behaviour therapy (ICBT) could be a viable alternative to face-to-face cognitive behaviour therapy (CBT) that avoids the negative impacts of delayed interventions. Based on evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs), this systematic review investigated the efficacy of minimally guided self-help ICBT, without face-to-face therapy, for the prevention, treatment and relapse prevention of all types of EDs in adults. The electronic databases MEDLINE, PsychINFO, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched between 1991 and 2021. Inclusion criteria specified RCTs with ICBT versus inactive comparison groups. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool-2 was used for quality assessments. Qualitative synthesis and meta-analyses were conducted. Findings typically showed medium significant beneficial effect sizes for prevention studies ranging from (-0.31 [95% CI: -0.57, -0.06] to -0.47 [95% CI: -0.82, -0.11]) and generally large effect sizes for the treatment studies ranging from (-0.30 [95% CI: -0.57, -0.03] to -1.11 [95% CI: -1.47, -0.75]). Relapse prevention studies yielded mainly small non-significant beneficial effects with significant effect sizes of (-0.29 [95% CI: -0.56, -0.03] and -0.43 [95% CI: -0.70, -0.16]). Only the treatment studies reached clinical significance and cognitive symptoms improved more than behavioural symptoms. ICBT appears to be efficacious for the prevention, treatment and relapse prevention of eating disorders with treatment interventions being the most beneficial. However, the evidence base is very small, particularly for treatment and relapse prevention, indicating the need for more high-quality RCTs.

The response of subgroups of patients with schizophrenia to different antipsychotic drugs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

As comparatively few trials in subgroups of patients with schizophrenia have been done, clinicians need to know whether they can rely on the results of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in the general population of patients with schizophrenia. We aimed to compare the efficacy and side-effects of antipsychotic drugs in different subgroups. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched reference lists of previous systematic reviews and meta-analyses, the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register (from database inception to April 27, 2020), and PubMed (from April 1, 2020 to June 14, 2021). We excluded studies in patients with stable schizophrenia (ie, relapse prevention studies), studies with a high risk of bias, and studies from mainland China due to quality concerns concerning allocation and masking methods. We included single-blind RCTs or better that assessed one or more of 16 second-generation and 18 first-generation antipsychotics in the general population of patients with schizophrenia or in one or more of the subgroups: children and adolescents (age range as defined in the original studies), patients with a first episode, patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms, patients with comorbid substance use, patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, or older patients (age range as defined in the original studies). Two authors independently screened the results of the search, retrieved full-text articles, and checked the inclusion criteria. Using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guideline, all parameters were extracted in duplicate. The primary outcome was change in overall symptoms. We compared drug efficacy between subgroups, by sex, schizoaffective disorder versus schizophrenia, and study origin using random-effects, inverse variance meta-analyses and random-effects subgroup tests, and meta-regression. We included 537 RCTs with 76 382 participants, 26 627 (34·9%) women, 49 755 (65·1%) men, mean age 37·3 years (range of means 7·9-80·2; ethnicity data not available). 412 RCTs included patients in the general population of patients with schizophrenia, 42 included patients with treatment-resistant schizophrenia, 25 included children and adolescents, 20 included patients with their first episode, 20 included patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms, 13 included patients with comorbid substance use, and 11 included older patients. Of 507 random-effects subgroup tests done, 46 (9%) showed a significant difference (p<0·05) between subgroups, but there was no clear indication as to which drug should be used in which subgroup. The effects of antipsychotics in various patient subgroups were usually similar to those in the general population of patients with schizophrenia, but comparably few studies contributed to the subgroups, in particular in terms of side-effects. If the evidence for treatment in a given subgroup is small, guideline makers and clinicians should consider using the results in the much better studied group of the general population of patients with schizophrenia. German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung; FKZ 01KG1508).

Mindfulness for smoking cessation.

Mindfulness for smoking cessation.

Agomelatine for the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: focus on its distinctive mechanism of action.

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), the most frequently diagnosed form of anxiety, is usually treated by cognitive-behavioural approaches or medication; in particular, benzodiazepines (acutely) and serotonin or serotonin/noradrenaline reuptake inhibitors (long term). Efficacy, compliance, and acceptability are, however, far from ideal, reinforcing interest in alternative options. Agomelatine, clinically employed in the treatment of major depression, expresses anxiolytic properties in rodents and was effective in the treatment of GAD (including severely ill patients) in several double-blind, short-term (12 weeks) and relapse-prevention (6 months) studies. At active doses, the incidence of adverse effects was no higher than for placebo. Agomelatine possesses a unique binding profile, behaving as a melatonin (MT1/MT2) receptor agonist and 5-HT2C receptor antagonist, yet recognizing neither monoamine transporters nor GABAA receptors. Extensive evidence supports a role for 5-HT2C receptors in the induction of anxious states, and their blockade likely plays a primary role in mediating the anxiolytic actions of agomelatine, including populations in the amygdala and bed nucleus of stria terminalis, as well as the hippocampus. Recruitment of MT receptors in the suprachiasmatic nucleus, thalamic reticular nucleus, and hippocampus appears to fulfil a complimentary role. Downstream of 5-HT2C and MT receptors, modulation of stress-sensitive glutamatergic circuits and altered release of the anxiogenic neuropeptides, corticotrophin-releasing factor, and vasopressin, may be implicated in the actions of agomelatine. To summarize, agomelatine exerts its anxiolytic actions by mechanisms clearly distinct from those of other agents currently employed for the management of GAD.Plain Language Summary How agomelatine helps in the treatment of anxiety disorders Introduction:• Anxiety disorders have a significant negative impact on quality of life.• The most common type of anxiety disorder, called generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), is associated with nervousness and excessive worry.• These symptoms can lead to additional symptoms like tiredness, sleeplessness, irritability, and poor attention.• GAD is generally treated through either cognitive-behavioural therapy or medication. However, widely used drugs like benzodiazepines and serotonin reuptake inhibitors have adverse effects.• Agomelatine, a well-established antidepressant drug, has shown anxiety-lowering (‘anxiolytic’) properties in rats and has been shown to effectively treat GAD with minimal side effects.• However, exactly how it acts on the brain to manage GAD is not yet clear.• Thus, this review aims to shed light on agomelatine’s mechanism of action in treating GAD.Methods:• The authors reviewed studies on how agomelatine treats anxiety in animals.• They also looked at clinical studies on the effects of agomelatine in people with GAD.Results:• The study showed that agomelatine ‘blocks’ a receptor in nerve cells, which plays a role in causing anxiety, called the 5-HT2C receptor.• Blocking this receptor, especially in specific brain regions such as nerve cells of the amygdala, bed nucleus of stria terminalis, and hippocampus, produced the anxiety reduction seen during agomelatine treatment.• Agomelatine also activates the melatonin (MT) receptor, which is known to keep anxiety in check, promote sleep, and maintain the sleep cycle.• Agomelatine should thus tackle sleep disturbances commonly seen in patients with GAD.• Beyond 5-HT2C and MT receptors, signalling molecules in nerve cells that are known to be involved in anxiety disorders (called ‘neurotransmitters’ and ‘neuropeptides’) are also affected by agomelatine.Conclusion:• Agomelatine’s anxiolytic effects are caused by mechanisms that are distinct from those of other medications currently used to treat GAD.• This explains its therapeutic success and minimal adverse side effects.

P.0713 Effectiveness and safety of vortioxetine in real-world clinical practice in China: results from the prospective RELIEVE China study

Vortioxetine, a novel antidepressant for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), is a 5-HT3, 5-HT7 and 5-HT1D receptor antagonist, 5-HT1B receptor partial agonist, 5-HT1A receptor agonist and serotonin (5-HT) transporter (SERT) inhibitor. Here we review its preclinical and clinical properties and discuss translational aspects. Vortioxetine increases serotonergic, noradrenergic, dopaminergic, cholinergic, histaminergic and glutamatergic neurotransmission in brain structures associated with MDD. These multiple effects likely derive from its interaction with 5-HT-receptor-mediated negative feedback mechanisms controlling neuronal activity. In particular, 5-HT3 receptors may play a prominent role, since their blockade i) increases pyramidal neuron activity by removing 5-HT3 receptor-mediated excitation of GABA interneurons, and ii) augments SSRI effects on extracellular 5-HT. However, modulation of the other 5-HT receptor subtypes also likely contributes to vortioxetine's pharmacological effects. Preclinical animal models reveal differences from SSRIs and SNRIs, including antidepressant-like activity, increased synaptic plasticity and improved cognitive function. Vortioxetine had clinical efficacy in patients with MDD: 11 placebo-controlled studies (including one in elderly) with efficacy in 8 (7 positive, 1 supportive), 1 positive active comparator study plus a positive relapse prevention study. In two positive studies, vortioxetine was superior to placebo in pre-defined cognitive outcome measures. The clinically effective dose range (5–20 mg/day) spans ~50 to >80% SERT occupancy. SERT and 5-HT3 receptors are primarily occupied at 5 mg, while at 20 mg, all targets are likely occupied at functionally relevant levels. The side-effect profile is similar to that of SSRIs, with gastrointestinal symptoms being most common, and a low incidence of sexual dysfunction and sleep disruption possibly ascribed to vortioxetine's receptor modulation.

Later is not necessarily better: limitations of survival analysis in studies of long-term drug treatment of psychiatric conditions

Survival analysis is routinely used to assess differences between groups in relapse prevention and treatment discontinuation studies involving people with long-term psychiatric conditions. The actual outcome in survival analysis is...

Efficacy and Safety of Intranasal Esketamine in Treatment-Resistant Depression in Adults: A Systematic Review.

Intranasal form of esketamine, the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine, was approved by the US FDA in 2019 for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in adults. Since intranasal esketamine is a newly approved drug with a novel mechanism of action, much still remains unknown in regard to its use in TRD. The objective of this study is to systematically review the latest existing evidence on intranasal esketamine, and provide a better insight into its safety and efficacy in TRD in adults.PubMed, MEDLINE (through PubMed), and Google Scholar were systematically searched from 2016 to 2021, using automation tools. After removal of duplicates and screening on the basis of title/abstract, eligibility criteria were applied and quality appraisal was done independently by two reviewers.A total of 10 studies were selected for the final review which included five clinical trials (three short-term trials, one withdrawal design relapse prevention study, and one long-term study), three post hoc studies, one case/non-case study, and one review article. Out of three short-term clinical trials, only one demonstrated a statistically significant difference between treatment with esketamine plus oral antidepressant (OAD) vs placebo plus OAD. The result of the relapse prevention study showed significantly delayed relapse of depressive symptoms in esketamine plus OAD arm when compared to placebo plus OAD arm. Similarly, the result of the long-term clinical trial showed that the improvement in depressive symptoms was found to be sustained in those using esketamine. The most common adverse effects of esketamine included nausea, dizziness, dissociation, headache, vertigo, somnolence, and dysgeusia (altered sense of taste); most were mild-moderate in severity. One case/non-case study reported rare adverse effects including panic attacks, mania, ataxia, akathisia, self-harm ideation, increased loquacity (talkativeness), and autoscopy.Intranasal esketamine has shown efficacy in reducing depressive symptoms in clinical trials, but the clinical meaningfulness of the treatment effect in the real-world population still needs to be explored. Although the safety profile of esketamine appears to be favorable in most clinical trials, some serious side effects are being reported to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System, and therefore requires further investigation. More robust clinical trials, especially long-term randomized controlled trials are needed which can help provide a better assessment on the efficacy and safety of intranasal esketamine in the treatment of TRD.

Cariprazine, A Broad-Spectrum Antipsychotic for the Treatment of Schizophrenia: Pharmacology, Efficacy, and Safety.

Schizophrenia is characterized by positive, negative, cognitive, and affective symptoms. Antipsychotic medications, which work by blocking the dopamine D2 receptor, are the foundation of pharmacotherapy for schizophrenia to control positive symptoms. Cariprazine is a dopamine D3 receptor-preferring D3/D2 partial agonist antipsychotic that is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia (USA and European Union [EU]) and manic and depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder (USA). Partial agonist agents have a lower intrinsic activity at receptors than full agonists, so they act as either functional agonists or functional antagonists depending on the surrounding neurotransmitter environment. Beyond efficacy against positive symptoms, the unique D3-preferring partial agonist pharmacology of cariprazine suggests potential advantages against negative symptoms, and cognitive and functional impairment, which are challenging to treat. The efficacy and safety of cariprazine in adult patients with schizophrenia have been demonstrated in four short-term randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials, two long-term open-label studies, one relapse prevention study, and one prospective negative symptom study versus the active comparator risperidone. Additional post hoc investigations have supported efficacy across individual symptoms and domains in schizophrenia, as well as in diverse areas of interest including cognition, functioning, negative symptoms, hostility, and global well-being. This comprehensive review of cariprazine summarizes its pharmacologic profile, clinical trial evidence, and post hoc investigations. Collective evidence suggests that the pharmacology of cariprazine may offer broad-spectrum efficacy advantages for patients with schizophrenia, including effects against difficult-to-treat negative and cognitive symptoms, as well as functional improvements. Cariprazine was generally safe and well tolerated in patients with short- and long-term exposure and no new safety concerns were associated with longer-duration treatment.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT00404573, NCT00694707, NCT01104766, NCT01104779, NCT01412060, NCT00839852, NCT01104792.

Defining "Adequately Treated": A Post Hoc Analysis Examining Characteristics of Patients with Schizophrenia Successfully Transitioned from Once-Monthly Paliperidone Palmitate to Once-Every-3-Months Paliperidone Palmitate.

PurposePaliperidone palmitate once every 3 months (PP3M) is indicated in adults with schizophrenia adequately treated with once-monthly paliperidone palmitate (PP1M) for at least 4 months, in whom the last two consecutive doses are the same. The decision of when to transition to PP3M is based on the patient’s symptom status while receiving PP1M.Patients and MethodsIn a double-blind relapse–prevention study (NCT01529515), patients who met Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score stabilization criteria after 4 months of PP1M were eligible for transition to PP3M; those who continued to meet stabilization criteria after 12 weeks following an open-label PP3M dose were randomized to receive PP3M or placebo. We compared (post hoc) PANSS, Clinical Global Impression–Severity (CGI-S), and Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scores during the pre-randomization, open-label phase in patients in randomized versus non-randomized groups using analysis of variance or chi-square tests.ResultsOf 506 patients enrolled, 305 were randomized. After 4 months’ PP1M treatment, PANSS and CGI-S scores were significantly lower and PSP scores significantly higher in randomized patients versus non-randomized patients (least squares means [95% CI]: 57.1 [55.7, 58.6] vs 62.2 [60.0, 64.3], 2.9 [2.8, 3.1] vs 3.3 [3.1, 3.4], and 67.0 [65.7, 68.3] vs 64.5 [62.6, 66.4], respectively); changes from baseline between groups differed significantly (all P ≤0.009).ConclusionConfirming adequate stabilization with PP1M prior to transitioning to PP3M is critical in maximizing treatment response; clinicians should consider transitioning patients to PP3M only if patients respond well to PP1M for at least 4 months and their last two consecutive doses are the same.

HARMONY Study: Pimavanserin Significantly Prolongs Time to Relapse of Dementia-Related Psychosis

Dementia-related psychosis (DRP) is common among patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), Parkinson’s disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal dementia (FTD), and vascular dementia (VaD) and is associated with poor outcomes. HARMONY (NCT03325556) was a Phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomized, relapse-prevention study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pimavanserin for treating hallucinations and delusions associated with DRP. Patients with dementia and moderate-severe psychosis received open-label (OL) pimavanserin for 12 weeks. Patients with sustained response (≥30% reduction in Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms hallucinations+delusions Total Score AND Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score of much/very much improved) at Weeks 8 and 12 were randomized 1:1 to continue pimavanserin or receive placebo for up to 26 weeks in the double-blind (DB) period. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to relapse of DRP. 392 patients enrolled. 217 (61.8%) eligible patients experienced sustained response and were randomized. OL response was similar regardless of dementia subtype (randomization rates: 59.8% AD, 71.2% PDD, 71.4% VaD, 45.5% DLB, 50.0% FTD), baseline disease characteristics, age, dementia severity, or previous drug therapy. The study stopped early for superior efficacy when a prespecified interim analysis revealed >2.8-fold reduction in risk of relapse with pimavanserin (hazard ratio: 0.353; 95% CI: 0.172, 0.727; 1-sided p=0.0023). Adverse event rates were low and balanced (OL: 36.2%; DB: 41.0% pimavanserin, 36.6% placebo). No negative impact on cognition or motor function was observed. The Harmony study demonstrated a robust decrease in hallucinations and delusions and significant maintenance of efficacy with pimavanserin treatment in DRP.

HARMONY: Response to pimavanserin in the 12‐week, open‐label treatment phase

AbstractBackgroundDementia‐related psychosis (DRP) is common in patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), Parkinson’s disease dementia (PDD), vascular dementia (VaD), and frontotemporal dementia (FTD). However, no therapies have been approved. Current guidelines and real‐world practice involve a trial of off‐label antipsychotics when other interventions fail, with assessment of response in an individual patient and taper within 4 months in patients who have responded. Pimavanserin is an inverse agonist/antagonist at the 5‐HT2A receptor and is approved in the U.S. for treating hallucinations and delusions associated with Parkinson’s disease psychosis. The objective of this analysis was to examine the response (≥30% reduction on the SAPS‐H+D Total Score AND a CGI‐I score of 1=very much improved or 2=much improved) to pimavanserin during open‐label treatment of patients with DRP.MethodHARMONY was a placebo‐controlled, randomized, Phase 3, relapse prevention study in patients with dementia (NIA‐AA criteria) and moderate to severe psychosis associated with PDD, DLB, AD, FTD or VaD. Eligible patients who failed brief psychosocial therapy during screening entered into a 12‐week open‐label (OL) period where they received pimavanserin 34 mg once daily. Patients were assessed for response at Weeks 8 and 12. Only patients who demonstrated sustained response (response at both Weeks 8 and 12) were eligible to randomize into the double‐blind portion of the trial. OL response rates and changes in psychotic symptoms were assessed in various subgroups within the study populationResult392 patients were enrolled into the open‐label period; 41 patients were ongoing at the time of early study termination. Overall, 61.8% of patients demonstrated sustained response (59.8% AD, 71.2% PDD, 71.4% VaD, 45.5% DLB, and 50.0% FTD). Mean change in the SAPS scores across the OL period was similar regardless of dementia subtype or baseline characteristics. The response rate was similar regardless of age, dementia severity, or previous drug therapy, with more than 50% patients meeting response criteria at Week 4 across most factors.ConclusionIn this Phase 3 study, during the OL treatment phase, pimavanserin produced a robust reduction in psychosis symptoms, irrespective of most likely clinical diagnosis of dementia subtype or baseline MMSE/dementia severity.

A pilot study of mindfulness-based relapse prevention for compulsive sexual behaviour disorder.

Background and aims Compulsive sexual behaviour disorder (CSBD) is a medical condition that can impair social and occupational functioning and lead to severe distress. To date, treatment effectiveness studies of CSBD are under-developed; typically, treatment for CSBD is based on guidelines for substance or other behavioural addictions. Mindfulness-based relapse prevention (MBRP) is an evidence-based treatment for substance addiction aimed at, among other things, reducing craving and negative affect—i.e. processes that are implicated in the maintenance of problematic sexual behaviours. However, to our knowledge no prior research has been published evaluating mindfulness-based intervention (MBI) in the treatment of CSBD, except two clinical case reports. Therefore, the aim of the current pilot study was to examine whether MBRP can lead to clinical improvement in CSBD.MethodsParticipants were 13 adult males with a diagnosis of CSBD. Before and after the eight-week MBRP intervention, participants completed a booklet of questionnaires including measurements of porn viewing, masturbation and emotional distress.ResultsAs expected, we found that after MBRP participants spent significantly less time engaging in problematic pornography use and exhibited a decrease in anxiety, depression and obsessive-compulsive (OC) symptoms.Discussion and ConclusionsThe findings indicate that MBRP could be beneficial for CSBD individuals. Further clinical effectiveness studies with bigger sample sizes, delayed post-training measurements and randomised control trial design are warranted. In conclusion, MBRP leads to a decrease in time spent watching porn and a decrease in emotional distress in CSBD patients.

Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of 32 Oral Antipsychotics for the Acute Treatment of Adults With Multi-Episode Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

(Reprinted with permission from the Lancet 2019; 394: 939-51).

427 - HARMONY study: pimavanserin significantly reduces risk of relapse of dementia-related psychosis

AbstractDementia-related psychosis (DRP) is common among patients with Alzheimer’s disease (AD), Parkinson’s disease (PD), dementia with Lewy bodies (DLB), frontotemporal dementia (FTD), and vascular dementia (VaD) and is associated with poor outcomes. HARMONY (NCT03325556) was a Phase 3, placebo-controlled, randomized, relapse-prevention study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pimavanserin for treating hallucinations and delusions associated with DRP. Patients with dementia and moderate-severe psychosis received open-label (OL) pimavanserin for 12 weeks. Patients with a sustained response (≥30% reduction in Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms hallucinations+delusions Total Score AND Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score of much/very much improved) at Weeks 8 and 12 were randomized 1:1 to continue pimavanserin or receive placebo for up to 26 weeks in the double-blind (DB) period. The primary endpoint was time from randomization to relapse of DRP. 392 patients enrolled. 217 (61.8%) eligible patients experienced sustained response and were randomized. OL response was similar regardless of dementia subtype (randomization rates: 59.8% AD, 71.2% PDD, 71.4% VaD, 45.5% DLB, 50.0% FTD), baseline disease characteristics, age, dementia severity, or previous drug therapy. The study stopped early for superior efficacy when a prespecified interim analysis revealed &gt;2.8-fold reduction in risk of relapse with pimavanserin (hazard ratio: 0.353; 95% CI: 0.172, 0.727; 1-sided p=0.0023). Adverse event rates were low and balanced (OL: 36.2%; DB: 41.0% pimavanserin, 36.6% placebo). No negative trends for worsening in cognition (as assessed by the Mini-Mental State Examination) or motor function were observed. The HARMONY study demonstrated a robust decrease in hallucinations and delusions and significant maintenance of efficacy with pimavanserin treatment in DRP.Study Sponsored By: ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.DisclosuresThis study was funded by ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.Drs. Foff, McEvoy, and Stankovic are all employees of ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc. (San Diego, CA, USA).Dr Cummings has provided consultation to ACADIA, Accera, Actinogen, AgeneBio, Alkahest, Allergan, Alzheon, Avanir, Axsome, Binomics, BiOasis Technologies, Biogen, Bracket, Cassava, Denali, Diadem, EIP Pharma, Eisai, Genentech, Green Valley, Grifols, Hisun, Idorsia, Lundbeck, Merck, Otsuka, Pain Therapeutics, Probiodrug, Proclara, QR, Resverlogix, Roche, Samumed, Shinkei Therapeutics, Sunovion, Suven, Takeda, and United Neuroscience pharmaceutical and assessment companies. He owns stock in ADAMAS, BioAsis, MedAvante, and QR Pharma. Dr. Cummings owns the copyright of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). Dr. Cummings is supported by a COBRE grant from NIH/NIGMS #P20GM109025 and Keep Memory Alive.Dr. Soto has provided consultation to ACADIA, Avanir, Eisai, Lundbeck, and Otsuka.

Comparison of Relapse Prevention with 3 Different Paliperidone Formulations in Patients with Schizophrenia Continuing versus Discontinuing Active Antipsychotic Treatment: A Post-Hoc Analysis of 3 Similarly Designed Randomized Studies.

BackgroundSudden discontinuation from antipsychotic treatment is a common occurrence in patients with schizophrenia. Lower rates of relapse could be expected for patients discontinuing treatment from longer-acting formulations vs their shorter-acting equivalents.ObjectiveTo compare relapse rates and time-to-relapse between the active (analogous to adherent patients) and placebo (analogous to non-adherent patients in the real-world) arms of three different formulations of paliperidone (oral paliperidone extended release [paliperidone ER], paliperidone palmitate once monthly [PP1M], and paliperidone palmitate three monthly [PP3M] long-acting injectables).MethodsData from three similarly designed, randomized relapse prevention studies in adult patients with schizophrenia were analyzed.ResultsIn total, 922 patients were included (active treatment: 473, placebo: 449). Lowest percentage of patients experienced relapse with PP3M <PP1M <paliperidone and ER, in both the active treatment (PP3M, 9% <PP1M, 18% <paliperidone ER, 22%) and placebo (PP3M, 29% <PP1M, 48% <paliperidone ER, 52%) groups. The post-discontinuation median-time-to-relapse was significantly longer with PP3M (395 days [274 days to “not-reached”])> PP1M (172 days [134–222 days])> paliperidone ER (58 days [42–114 days]) and was “not-estimable” in the active treatment group due to low relapse rates. Hazard ratios (HR) of the three paliperidone formulations relative to their respective placebos were PP3M ([HR: 3.81; 95% CI: 2.08, 6.99; P< 0.0001]> PP1M [HR: 3.60; 95% CI: 2.45, 5.28; P<0.0001]> paliperidone ER [HR: 2.83; 95% CI: 1.73, 4.63; P<0.001]).ConclusionThe lower percentage of relapse during active treatment and longer time to relapse after discontinuing active treatment with longer-duration antipsychotic formulations suggests the benefit of longer-acting over shorter-acting formulations, especially in patients susceptible to poor adherence.Clinical trial registration: paliperidone ER (NCT00086320), PP1M (NCT00111189), and PP3M (NCT01529515).

M201. MODERATORS OF WEIGHT GAIN IN RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIALS OF SCHIZOPHRENIA – A META-REGRESSION ANALYSIS

BackgroundWeight gain is an important side effect of antipsychotics. Meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials indicate differences between the multiple antipsychotics in propensity to cause weight gain. However, antipsychotic-associated weight gain, in randomized controlled trials as well as in real life situations, might also depend on population characteristics and treatment-related factors.As a preparatory work for a systematic review and network-meta-analysis on metabolic side effects of antipsychotics (presented in another poster at this conference), we conducted a meta-regression analysis of potential moderators of weight gain.MethodsWe selected acute phase short-term, acute phase long-term as well as relapse prevention studies (all found by systematic reviews conducted by our group in the past) from our database of randomized controlled trials of antipsychotics in schizophrenia.We conductedi) meta-regression-analyses based on pairwise meta-analysis of the mean difference (MD) in change in weight (kg) between patients exposed to antipsychotics and placebo, andii) meta-regression-analyses based on single-arm meta-analysis of the change in weight (kg).We examined the moderators baseline weight, study duration, percentage women, and publication year.We conducted the analyses for all drugs pooled, placebo and per individual drug. For presentation of the results we focus on the drugs aripiprazole, haloperidol, quetiapine, olanzapine, and risperidone, because these are popular drugs in clinical practice, they differ in their receptor-binding profiles and multiple studies are available for these drugs.We conducted the analysis in R using the commands metacont, metagen and metareg from the package meta.ResultsThe dataset comprises 603 randomized controlled trials with 141 584 patients that examined 40 different antipsychotics. Trial duration varied between 3 and 156 weeks (median 8 weeks). 168 studies with 49 670 patients reported on change in body weight.We found no effect of baseline weight on antipsychotic-associated weight gain, however on placebo, lower baseline weight was associated with more weight loss.Moreover, on antipsychotics, higher percentage of women was associated with less weight gain, and, on placebo, higher percentage of women was associated with more weight loss.Longer study duration was not associated with increased weight gain. On placebo, longer studies were associated with more weight loss.There was no effect of publication year.DiscussionSurprisingly, we found no moderating effect of baseline weight and study duration on weight gain. However, our data suggests that men and women could have different risk of weight gain. Moreover, weight loss after switching to placebo might be higher in women and patients with less baseline weight. For interpretation, it must be noted that meta-regressions are observational evidence and thus prone to confounding. In addition, the scatter plots, presented on the poster, need to be considered to judge the robustness and magnitude of the moderated effects. Additional meta-regressions (planned to present on the poster) should address further potential moderators, such as antipsychotic dose, ethnicity, previous antipsychotic exposure and dropout rates.

Efficacy of vortioxetine in patients with major depressive disorder reporting childhood or recent trauma

BackgroundThis analysis investigates the efficacy of vortioxetine in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) who report childhood or recent trauma. MethodsPatient-level data were analyzed from 4 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled short-term studies investigating the efficacy of vortioxetine (5–20 mg/day) versus placebo in patients (18–75 years old) with DSM-IV-TR–defined MDD. Changes from baseline to week 8 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Clinical Global Impression - Improvement (CGI-I), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) were examined at the individual study level and as in meta-analysis. A long-term relapse prevention study of 5 and 10 mg of vortioxetine was also analyzed. Traumatic events history was recorded at baseline. ResultsSixty-one percent of subjects (1113/1811) reported trauma history in the short-term studies. A significant effect vs. placebo was observed for vortioxetine on MADRS (10 mg, –2.2, P = .025; 20 mg, –4.4, P < .001), HAM-A (20 mg, –1.60, P = .012), CGI-I (5 mg, –0.3, P = .028; 10 mg, –0.3, P = .013; 20 mg, –0.50, P = .009), and SDS (20 mg, –2.3, P = .007) in patients with any trauma (childhood and/or recent). In the relapse prevention study, 51% (198/392) of subjects reported a history of trauma. Subjects with any trauma (childhood and/or recent) randomized to placebo were significantly more likely to relapse than subjects treated with vortioxetine (hazard ratio 2.8, P = .0019). LimitationsAn exploratory analysis. DiscussionVortioxetine showed significant short- and long-term efficacy on depressive and anxiety symptoms and overall functioning in this large subpopulation of MDD patients with a history of trauma. A significantly lower risk of relapse was also observed with vortioxetine.

Prophylactic Donor Lymphocyte Infusion for Relapse Prevention; A Meta-Analysis

Objective: relapsed hematologic malignancies after standard hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) is one of the most challenging diseases to treat, therefore ongoing research are aiming at relapse prevention and minimizing the transplant related side effects. Prophylactic donor lymphocytes (pDLI) had been proposed as a valuable strategy for relapse prevention but early study results had been discouraging due to association with acute graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD). We attempted to establish the efficacy of pDLI for relapse prevention and define its association with aGVHD. Method: we searched for titles of articles in MEDLINE (PubMed), Cochrane library, EMBASE database and Google Scholar in May 2019 that evaluated the association between pDLI, relapse and aGVHD. We conducted a random effect meta-analysis of 9 studies involving a total of 748 participants and reported the pooled odd ratio (OR) for incidence of relapse and aGVHD between patients in the pDLI group and the control group. Result: we found a significantly decreased risk of relapse in the pDLI group versus the control group with a pooled OR of 0.42, 95% CI 0.30-0.58, I2=0% while there is no significantly increased in the risk of aGVHD with a pooled OR of 0.98, 95% CI 0.56-1.72, I2=0.8% Conclusion: there is significantly decreased risk of relapse in the pDLI group compared to the control group but there is no statistically significant increased risk of aGVHD. We concluded that pDLI is a valuable method of post-transplant relapse prevention for hematologic malignancies and further research is encouraged in a larger population. Disclosures No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.