Kaushik Sarma

Lurasidone Monotherapy in the Treatment of Bipolar I Depression: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE The authors evaluated the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of patients with major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. METHOD Patients were randomly assigned to receive double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-60 mg/day [N=166] or 80-120 mg/day [N=169]) or placebo (N=170) for 6 weeks. Primary and key secondary endpoints were change from baseline to week 6 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and depression severity score on the Clinical Global Impressions scale for use in bipolar illness (CGI-BP), respectively. RESULTS Lurasidone treatment significantly reduced mean MADRS total scores at week 6 for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-15.4; effect size=0.51) compared with placebo (-10.7). Similarly, lurasidone treatment resulted in significantly greater endpoint reduction in CGI-BP depression severity scores for both the 20-60 mg/day group (-1.8; effect size=0.61) and the 80-120 mg/day group (-1.7; effect size=0.50) compared with placebo (-1.1). Both lurasidone groups also experienced significant improvements compared with placebo in anxiety symptoms and in patient-reported measures of quality of life and functional impairment. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events were similar in the 20-60 mg/day (6.6%), 80-120 mg/day (5.9%), and placebo (6.5%) groups. The most frequent adverse events associated with lurasidone were nausea, headache, akathisia, and somnolence. Minimal changes in weight, lipids, and measures of glycemic control were observed with lurasidone. CONCLUSION Monotherapy with lurasidone in the dosage range of 20-120 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression. Lurasidone was well tolerated, with few changes in weight or metabolic parameters.

Efficacy and safety of lurasidone 80 mg/day and 160 mg/day in the treatment of schizophrenia: A randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE This study was designed to evaluate the short-term efficacy and safety of once-daily lurasidone (80 mg/day and 160 mg/day) in the treatment of an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. METHODS Participants, who were recently admitted inpatients with schizophrenia with an acute exacerbation of psychotic symptoms, were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of fixed-dose, double-blind treatment with lurasidone 80 mg (n=125), lurasidone 160 mg (n=121), quetiapine XR 600 mg (QXR-600 mg; n=119; active control included to test for assay sensitivity), or placebo (n=121), all dosed once daily in the evening. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures analysis of the change from Baseline to Week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (the primary efficacy measure) and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score (the key secondary efficacy measure). RESULTS Treatment with both doses of lurasidone or with QXR-600 mg was associated with significantly greater improvement at Week 6 on PANSS total score, PANSS positive and negative subscale scores, and CGI-S score compared with placebo. The endpoint responder rate (≥ 20% improvement in PANSS total score) was higher in subjects treated with lurasidone 80 mg (65%; p<0.001), lurasidone 160 mg (79%; p<0.001), and QXR-600 mg (79%; p<0.001) compared with placebo (41%). The proportion of patients experiencing ≥ 7% weight gain was 4% for each lurasidone group, 15% for the QXR-600 mg group, and 3% for the placebo group. Endpoint changes in levels of cholesterol, triglycerides, and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo, while the QXR-600 mg group showed a significant median increase compared with the placebo group in levels of cholesterol (p<0.001), LDL cholesterol (p<0.01), and triglycerides (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS Lurasidone 80 mg and 160 mg doses administered once-daily in the evening, were safe and effective treatments for subjects with acute schizophrenia, with increased response rates observed at the higher dose. Dose-related adverse effects were limited, and both doses were generally well-tolerated.

Long-term safety and tolerability of lurasidone in schizophrenia: a 12-month, double-blind, active-controlled study.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of lurasidone in the treatment of schizophrenia. Clinically stable adult outpatients with schizophrenia were randomized in a 2 : 1 ratio to 12 months of double-blind treatment with once-daily, flexibly-dosed lurasidone (40–120 mg) or risperidone (2–6 mg). Outcome measures included adverse events (AEs), vital signs, ECG, and laboratory tests. Secondary assessments included measures of psychopathology. A total of 427 patients were randomized to treatment with lurasidone and 202 with risperidone. The three most frequent AEs in the lurasidone group (vs. risperidone) were nausea (16.7 vs. 10.9%), insomnia (15.8 vs. 13.4%), and sedation (14.6 vs. 13.9%); the three most frequent AEs in the risperidone group (vs. lurasidone) were increased weight (19.8 vs. 9.3%), somnolence (17.8 vs. 13.6%), and headache (14.9 vs. 10.0%). A higher proportion of patients receiving risperidone had at least a 7% endpoint increase in weight (14 vs. 7%). The median endpoint change in prolactin was significantly higher for risperidone (P<0.001). A comparable improvement in efficacy measures was observed with both agents and the rates of relapse were similar. All-cause discontinuation rates were higher for lurasidone versus risperidone. Long-term treatment with lurasidone was generally well tolerated in this study, with minimal effects on weight and metabolic outcomes.

Effectiveness of lurasidone vs. quetiapine XR for relapse prevention in schizophrenia: A 12-month, double-blind, noninferiority study

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the relapse prevention efficacy of lurasidone compared with quetiapine XR (QXR) in adults patients with schizophrenia. METHOD This double-blind study evaluated the relapse prevention efficacy of 12 months of flexible-dose treatment with lurasidone (40-160 mg/day) compared with QXR (200-800 mg/day), in outpatients with an acute exacerbation of chronic schizophrenia who had recently completed a 6-week placebo-controlled trial of treatment with either lurasidone or QXR. The primary endpoint, time-to-relapse, was analyzed using a Cox proportional hazards model in this noninferiority trial. RESULTS The Kaplan-Meier estimate of the probability of relapse over 12 months was 23.7% for subjects receiving lurasidone vs. 33.6% for QXR. The hazard ratio [95% CI] for probability of relapse was 0.728 [0.410, 1.295] (log-rank p=0.280). Since the upper limit of the hazard ratio (1.295) was smaller than the prespecified noninferiority margin (1.93), noninferiority of lurasidone compared with QXR was demonstrated in this study. The probability of hospitalization at 12 months was lower for the lurasidone group compared with the QXR group (9.8% vs. 23.1%; log-rank p=0.049). A significantly higher proportion of lurasidone subjects achieved remission at study endpoint compared with the QXR group (61.9% vs. 46.3%; p=0.043). Discontinuation rates due to AEs were similar for lurasidone and QXR (7% vs. 5%). Treatment with lurasidone was not associated with clinically significant changes in weight or metabolic parameters. CONCLUSIONS Twelve months of treatment with lurasidone met noninferiority criteria, and was associated with higher rates of remission, and reduced risk of hospitalization compared with QXR. No clinically significant effects on weight or metabolic parameters were observed during maintenance treatment with lurasidone.

LURASIDONE IN THE LONG-TERM TREATMENT OF PATIENTS WITH BIPOLAR DISORDER: A 24-WEEK OPEN-LABEL EXTENSION STUDY

The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of 6 months of open‐label, uncontrolled extension treatment with lurasidone in patients with a diagnosis of bipolar depression who completed 6 weeks of acute treatment.

Dasotraline for the Treatment of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Proof-of-Concept Trial in Adults

Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is a neurodevelopmental disorder characterized by symptoms of inattention, hyperactivity, and impulsivity associated with clinically significant impairment in functioning. ADHD has an early onset, but frequently persists, with a prevalence estimate of 4% in adults. Dasotraline is a novel compound that is a potent inhibitor of dopamine and norepinephrine transporters that achieves stable plasma concentrations with once-daily dosing. In this study, adult outpatients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for ADHD were randomized to 4 weeks of double-blind, once-daily treatment with dasotraline 4 and 8 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline at week 4 in the ADHD Rating Scale, Version IV (ADHD RS-IV) total score. Secondary efficacy end points included the Clinical Global Impression, Severity (CGI-S) scale, modified for ADHD symptoms. Least squares (LS) mean improvements at week 4 in ADHD RS-IV total score were significantly greater for dasotraline 8 mg/day vs placebo (−13.9 vs −9.7; P=0.019), and nonsignificantly greater for 4 mg/day (−12.4; P=0.076). The LS mean improvements in modified CGI-S were significantly greater at week 4 for dasotraline 8 mg/day vs placebo (−1.1 vs −0.7; P=0.013), and for 4 mg/day vs placebo (−1.1 vs −0.7; P=0.021). The most frequent adverse events reported were insomnia, decreased appetite, nausea, and dry mouth. Discontinuations due to treatment-emergent adverse events were 10.3% and 27.8% of patients in 4 and 8 mg/day treatment groups, respectively. This study provides preliminary evidence that once-daily dosing with dasotraline, a long-acting, dual monoamine reuptake inhibitor, may be a safe and efficacious treatment for adult ADHD.

Assessment of human abuse potential of dasotraline compared to methylphenidate and placebo in recreational stimulant users

AIMS The aim of this study was to evaluate the abuse potential of dasotraline, a novel dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor with slow absorption (tmax, 10-12h) and elimination (t1/2=47-77 h) that is in development for the treatment of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS Recreational stimulant users (N=48) who had specific experience with cocaine, and who were able to distinguish methylphenidate (60 mg) versus placebo in a qualification session, were randomized, in a 6-period, double-blind, crossover design, to receive single doses of dasotraline 8 mg, 16 mg, and 36 mg, methylphenidate (MPH) 40 mg and 80 mg, and placebo. The primary endpoint was the Drug Liking Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score at the time of peak effect (Emax). RESULTS There were no significant differences between the 3 doses of dasotraline and placebo on the drug liking VAS at Emax, and on most secondary endpoints. Both doses of MPH had significantly higher VAS-drug liking scores at Emax relative to both placebo (P<0.001 for all comparisons) and dasotraline 8 mg (P<0.001), 16 mg (P<0.001) and 36 mg (P<0.01). The increase in heart rate for MPH and dasotraline 36 mg showed a time-course that closely matched subject-rated measures such as Any Effects VAS. CONCLUSIONS In this study, dasotraline was found to have low potential for abuse, which may be, in part, related to its established pharmacokinetics (PK) profile, which is characterized by slow absorption and gradual elimination.