David P. McDonnell

Post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome in patients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine long-acting injection, I: analysis of cases

BackgroundAn advance in the treatment of schizophrenia is the development of long-acting intramuscular formulations of antipsychotics, such as olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). During clinical trials, a post-injection syndrome characterized by signs of delirium and/or excessive sedation was identified in a small percentage of patients following injection with olanzapine LAI.MethodsSafety data from all completed and ongoing trials of olanzapine LAI were reviewed for possible cases of this post-injection syndrome. Descriptive analyses were conducted to characterize incidence, clinical presentation, and outcome. Regression analyses were conducted to assess possible risk factors.ResultsBased on approximately 45,000 olanzapine LAI injections given to 2054 patients in clinical trials through 14 October 2008, post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome occurred in approximately 0.07% of injections or 1.4% of patients (30 cases in 29 patients). Symptomatology was consistent with olanzapine overdose (e.g., sedation, confusion, slurred speech, altered gait, or unconsciousness). However, no clinically significant decreases in vital signs were observed. Symptom onset ranged from immediate to 3 to 5 hours post injection, with a median onset time of 25 minutes post injection. All patients recovered within 1.5 to 72 hours, and the majority continued to receive further olanzapine LAI injections following the event. No clear risk factors were identified.ConclusionsPost-injection delirium/sedation syndrome can be readily identified based on symptom presentation, progression, and temporal relationship to the injection, and is consistent with olanzapine overdose following probable accidental intravascular injection of a portion of the olanzapine LAI dose. Although there is no specific antidote for olanzapine overdose, patients can be treated symptomatically as needed. Special precautions include use of proper injection technique and a post-injection observation period.Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov ID; URL: http://http//www.clinicaltrials.gov/: NCT00094640, NCT00088478, NCT00088491, NCT00088465, and NCT00320489.

Classifying patients by antipsychotic adherence patterns using latent class analysis: characteristics of nonadherent groups in the California Medicaid (Medi-Cal) program.

OBJECTIVES This study identifies latent classes defined by varying degrees of adherence to antipsychotic drug therapy and examines the sociodemographic, clinical, and resource utilization correlates associated with membership in each adherence class. DATA AND METHODS Patient-level data were drawn from the 1994 to 2003, 100%-sample California Medicaid fee-for-service paid claims data for patients with schizophrenia (N = 36,195). The date of the first antipsychotic medication filled after January 1, 1999 was then used to divide each patients data into a 6-month preindex (baseline) and a 12-month postindex (follow-up) period. Three categorical adherence indicators-a dichotomous variable of medication possession ratio greater than 0.80, the number of antipsychotic treatment attempts, and time to a change in antipsychotic medications-and two covariates-a categorical variable of duration of therapy and a dichotomous variable of polypharmacy-were used in the latent class model. RESULTS A three-class model returned the lowest values for all the information criteria and was therefore interpreted as follows: The prevalence rates of the latent classes were 1) 14.8% for the adherent; 2) 20.7% for the partially adherent; and 3) 64.5% for the nonadherent. Membership in the nonadherent class was associated with minority ethnicity, being female, eligibility due to welfare status, prior hospitalizations, and a higher number of prior treatment episodes. Membership in the partially adherent class was associated with higher use of outpatient care, higher rates of depot antipsychotic drug use, and polypharmacy. CONCLUSION Multiple indicators of adherence to antipsychotic medication can be used to define classes of adherence that are associated with patient characteristics and distinct patterns of prior health-care use.

Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of olanzapine in patients with bipolar I depression

BACKGROUND Atypical antipsychotics are widely used in bipolar mania. However, the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar depression has not been comprehensively explored. AIMS To evaluate olanzapine monotherapy in patients with bipolar depression. METHOD Patients with bipolar depression received olanzapine (5-20 mg/day, n = 343) or placebo (n = 171) for 6 weeks. The primary outcome was change from baseline to end-point in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcomes included: Clinical Global Impression - Bipolar Version (CGI-BP) scale, 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-17) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores, and the rate of response (≥50% reduction in MADRS at end-point), recovery (MADRS ≤12 for ≥4 weeks plus treatment completion) and remission (MADRS ≤8). The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00510146). RESULTS Olanzapine demonstrated: significantly greater (P<0.04) improvements on MADRS (least-squares mean change -13.82 v. -11.67), HRSD-17 and YMRS total scores and all CGI-BP subscale scores v. placebo; significantly (P≤0.05) more response and remission, but not recovery; significantly (P<0.01) greater mean increases in weight, fasting cholesterol and triglycerides; and significantly more (P<0.001) patients gained ≥7% body weight. CONCLUSIONS Olanzapine monotherapy appears to be efficacious in bipolar depression. Additional long-term studies are warranted to confirm these results. Safety findings were consistent with the known safety profile of olanzapine.

Dose correspondence between olanzapine long-acting injection and oral olanzapine: recommendations for switching.

Oral-to-depot dose correspondence was explored in a 24-week study of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). Patients with schizophrenia stabilized on oral olanzapine of 10, 15, or 20 mg/day (n=1065) were randomized to continue their oral treatment or switch directly to a fixed dose of olanzapine LAI [(mg/weeks) 45/4, 150/2, 405/4, or 300/2] without oral supplementation. Six-month relapse rates for each LAI-dose group stratified by earlier oral dose were analyzed using a Cox proportional hazard model assessing risk of relapse relative to each oral dose. Relapse rates for the therapeutic LAI doses (≥150 mg) varied depending on earlier oral dose, ranging from 1.5% (patients switched from 10 mg/day to 300 mg/2 weeks) to 18.8% (patients switched from 20 mg/day to 150 mg/2 weeks). Switching from 10 mg/day to 405 mg/4 weeks produced a comparable risk of relapse as remaining on that oral dose [Hazard ratio (HR)=1.03]. Switching from 15 or 20 mg/day to 300 mg/2 weeks produced comparable risk of relapse as remaining on those oral doses (HR=0.68 and 1.13, respectively). Pharmacokinetic modeling was conducted to evaluate the resulting dosing recommendations. Findings suggest that patients can be switched directly from oral to olanzapine LAI without the need for oral supplementation and with a low risk of relapse when initiated on an appropriate LAI dose.

Long-Term Safety and Tolerability of Open-Label Olanzapine Long-Acting Injection in the Treatment of Schizophrenia: 190-Week Interim Results

The primary objective of this ongoing study is to examine the long-term safety and tolerability of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). Current results are from a 190-week interim analysis. Patients were 18–75 years of age with schizophrenia (N = 909) or schizoaffective disorder (N = 22) previously enrolled in 1 of 3 randomized clinical trials of olanzapine LAI. In this open-label extension study, all patients received flexibly-dosed olanzapine LAI every 2–4 weeks. At time of analysis, rate of study discontinuation was 46.3%. The 18-month discontinuation rate was 34.2%. Adverse events in ≥5% of patients were increased weight, insomnia, anxiety somnolence, headache, and nasopharyngitis. There were 26 occurrences of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome which all fully resolved within 72 hours. Mean weight change was +1.81 kg, with 32.1% of patients experiencing ≥7% weight gain. Mean Clinical Global Impressions-Severity scores remained stable throughout (2.9 at baseline to 2.8 at endpoint). Pharmacokinetic analyses indicated consistent olanzapine plasma concentrations over time, with no evidence of long-term accumulation. Safety profile was consistent with that of oral olanzapine, with the exception of findings specific to intramuscular injection. During the study period, there were 16 (1.7%) occurrences of treatment-emergent diabetes and 1 occurrence of treatment-emergent diabetic ketoacidosis. Percentages of patients with EPS scale-defined treatment-emergent akathisia, parkinsonism, and dyskinesia were 3.3%, 6.6%, and 3.0%, respectively.

Long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a 6-year, multinational, single-arm, open-label study.

The objective of this study was to assess the long-term safety and efficacy of olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI). A 6-year, single-arm, open-label extension study of olanzapine LAI was conducted at 127 sites in 25 countries. Patients were 18–76 years of age, were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N=931), and had been previously enrolled in one of three clinical trials of olanzapine LAI. Patients received flexibly dosed (45-405 mg) olanzapine LAI every 2–4 weeks. The mean duration of exposure was ∼3 years. A total of 393 (42.2%) patients completed the study. The mean weight change was +2.1 kg (P<0.001), with 40.6% of patients experiencing 7% or higher weight gain. Treatment-emergent categorical changes occurred in fasting glucose, total cholesterol, and triglyceride levels. Pharmacokinetic analyses revealed no systemic accumulation of olanzapine after long-term treatment. There were 36 occurrences of post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome, all resolving within 72 h. The mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total and subscale scores did not change significantly over the course of the study, indicating clinical stability. Olanzapine LAI appeared effective as a long-term maintenance treatment, with a safety profile generally consistent with the known profile of oral olanzapine, except for injection-related events (including post-injection delirium/sedation syndrome).

Comparison of metabolic changes in patients with schizophrenia during randomized treatment with intramuscular olanzapine long-acting injection versus oral olanzapine.

Metabolic changes were examined in patients with schizophrenia during treatment with either oral olanzapine or olanzapine long‐acting injection (LAI). Data were collected from patients who had been stabilized on oral olanzapine (10, 15, or 20 mg/day) for ≥4 weeks and then randomized to either continued olanzapine oral treatment (n = 322) or LAI (n = 599; 150 mg/2 weeks, 405 mg/4 weeks, or 300 mg/2 weeks) for up to 24 weeks. Mean and categorical changes in metabolic parameters were analyzed. Mean changes in weight, glucose, and most lipids were generally not significantly different between treatment groups. Weight changes over time followed similar patterns and were not significantly different at endpoint between the two treatment‐formulation groups. Low‐density lipoprotein cholesterol decreased significantly less among olanzapine LAI‐treated patients. Percentages of patients with potentially clinically significant changes in blood glucose and lipid concentrations were similar for the two treatments. Percentages of patients experiencing adverse events related to weight, diabetes, or dyslipidemia were also not significantly different between treatments. Metabolic changes in patients with schizophrenia appeared generally similar during treatment with oral olanzapine or olanzapine LAI. Copyright

Assessing the infrequent oral supplementation of olanzapine long-acting injection in the treatment of schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE Adding another antipsychotic to a treatment regimen was previously used in evaluating the medications efficacy. Supplementation of depot antipsychotics with oral antipsychotics is particularly meaningful because depot formulations are typically chosen for patients struggling with adherence to oral antipsychotics. This post-hoc analysis assessed supplementation of olanzapine long-acting injection (olanzapine-LAI) with oral olanzapine. SUBJECTS AND METHODS We used 12 months of data from an open-label, single-arm extension study of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder (N=931) treated with olanzapine-LAI. The prevalence, duration, time to first supplementation, and best predictors of oral supplementation were assessed. RESULTS Oral supplementation occurred in 21% of patients for a median of 31 days with mean modal dose of 10.8 mg/day. Mean time to first supplementation was shorter for patients who were at least moderately ill at baseline compared to less ill patients (47 vs. 97 days, p<0.001). Best predictors of oral supplementation included a more severe illness profile at baseline, lower olanzapine-LAI dose prior to oral supplementation, supervised living arrangements, and being African-American. CONCLUSION Supplementation of olanzapine-LAI appears to be infrequent, of relatively short duration, and reserved for more severely ill patients who may require a targeted rescue medication due to signs of impending relapse.

Efficacy and safety of olanzapine for treatment of patients with bipolar depression: Japanese subpopulation analysis of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of olanzapine monotherapy are evaluated in Japanese patients from a large, global study of bipolar depression.MethodsThis is an analysis of Japanese patients from a 6-week, global (Japan, China, Korea, Taiwan, and the United States), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study of patients with a depressive episode of bipolar I disorder. The primary outcome was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-BP), the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) total score, the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score, and rates of response (≥50% baseline-to-endpoint reduction in MADRS total score), recovery, and remission.ResultsOf the 156 Japanese patients, 104 had been allocated to olanzapine and 52 to placebo. All results are baseline-to-endpoint change. Compared to placebo, patients in the olanzapine group experienced greater improvement in the primary outcome measure, MADRS total score (−14.9 vs. −10.7; p = .01). They also had greater reductions in the following secondary measures: CGI- BP Depression (−1.41 vs. -0.89; p = .008), CGI-BP Bipolar (−1.31 vs. −0.83; p = .01), HAMD-17 (−11.7 vs. −7.9; p < .01), and YMRS (-0.32 vs. 0.34; p = .03). Differences in rates of response, recovery, and remission were not statistically significant. A greater proportion of olanzapine-treated patients reported treatment- emergent adverse events (87.5% vs. 59.6%; p < .001). Patients treated with olanzapine had greater increases in weight (p < .001) and fasting total cholesterol (p = .008); fasting triglycerides (p = .02), and fasting low-density lipoprotein (p = .01). There was a greater reduction in fasting high-density lipoprotein in olanzapine-treated patients (p = .01). Compared with placebo-group patients, more olanzapine-group patients shifted from borderline to high cholesterol (25.0% vs. 0.0%; p = .007) and had clinically significant weight gain (≥7% body weight) (20.2% vs. 1.9%; p = .001).ConclusionsResults of this analysis support the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine for the treatment of bipolar depression in Japanese patients. Results in this population were consistent with those seen in the more ethnically diverse parent study. In making treatment decisions for individual patients, clinicians should carefully consider the risks and benefits of olanzapine treatment.Trial RegistrationClinicatrials.gov ID NCT00510146 Olanzapine Treatment of Patients with Bipolar I Disorder

Treatment-completion rates with olanzapine long-acting injection versus risperidone long-acting injection in a 12-month, open-label treatment of schizophrenia: indirect, exploratory comparisons

Background Little is known about the comparative effectiveness of atypical antipsychotics in long-acting injection formulation. Due to the absence of head-to-head studies comparing olanzapine long-acting injection and risperidone long-acting injection, this study was intended to make exploratory, indirect, cross-study comparisons between the long-acting formulations of these two atypical antipsychotics in their effectiveness in treating patients with schizophrenia. Methods Indirect, cross-study comparisons between olanzapine long-acting injection and risperidone long-acting injection used 12-month treatment-completion rates, because discontinuation of an antipsychotic for any cause is a recognized proxy measure of the medication’s effectiveness in treating schizophrenia. Following a systematic review of the literature, two indirect comparisons were conducted using open-label, single-cohort studies in which subjects were stabilized on an antipsychotic medication before depot initiation. The first analysis compared olanzapine long-acting injection (one study) with pooled data from nine identified risperidone long-acting injection studies. The second analysis was a “sensitivity analysis,” using only the most similar studies, one for olanzapine long-acting injection and one for risperidone long-acting injection, which shared near-identical study designs and involved study cohorts with near-identical patient characteristics. Pearson Chi-square tests assessed group differences on treatment-completion rates. Results Comparison of olanzapine long-acting injection data (931 patients) with the pooled data from the nine risperidone long-acting injection studies (3950 patients) provided almost identical 12-month treatment-completion rates (72.7% versus 72.4%; P = 0.87). When the two most similar studies were compared, the 12-month completion rate for olanzapine long-acting injection was significantly higher than for risperidone long-acting injection (81.3% versus 47.0%; P < 0.001). However, any conclusions drawn from this comparison may be limited by differences in the studies’ geographic catchment areas. Conclusion Using treatment-completion rates as a proxy measure of medication effectiveness, olanzapine long-acting injection did not differ significantly from risperidone long-acting injection when including all eligible studies. However, the findings of this exploratory analysis should be interpreted with caution, considering the methodological limitations of these indirect, cross-study comparisons.