SlideShare uma empresa Scribd logo
1 de 10
Efficacy and Tolerability of Asenapine in
         Acute Schizophrenia: A placebo and
             Risperidone-Controlled Trial

                            Potkin, S., Cohen, M. Panagides, J.
Dep. Psychiatry and Human Behavior, University of California, Irvine. Brain Imaging Center, Irvine
Summary
OBJECTIVE: To asses the efficacy, tolerability and safety of the investigational
psychopharmacologic agent asenapine versus placebo in patients with acute
schizophrenia


RATIONALE: There is not current adequate pharmacologic control for the full
range of symptoms in schizophrenia.


RESULTS: Asenapine treatment produced statistically significant greater
improvement scores in positive and negative schizophrenic symptoms compared
with placebo. Furthermore, it was well tolerated and was not associated with
weight gain or prolactin elevation.
Introduction
Asenapine is a novel atypical psychopharmacologic agent in clinical development for
treatment for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Effectiveness of antipsychotic agents is measured against controlling positive
symptoms and prevention or delay in relapse. All psychopharmacologic agent
ameliorate positive symptoms to varying degree but not completely.

   There is not adequate or consistent control of negative symptoms

Asenapine modulates activity at dopamine D2 receptors to control positive
symptoms of schizophrenia. Asenapine shows almost not affinity for muscarinic
receptors and have minimal risks of anticholinergic side effects.

Atypical antipsychotics adverse effects include weight gain, diabetes, dyslipidemia,
sexual dysfunction, sedation, and others.

The unusual pharmacologic characteristics of asenapine may contribute to a
favorable clinical profile in controlling schizophrenia with a high degree of safety and
tolerability
Methods
TRIAL DESIGN: Treatment randomly assigned. Double blind, double-dummy, 3-arm, fixed
dose, 6-week, placebo and risperidone-controlled. Institution’s ethics committee or
review board-approved

PATIENT ELIGIBILITY: ≥ 18 years old. Schizophrenia diagnosis within the disorganized,
paranoid, catatonic or undifferentiated subtypes

PRIMARY OUTCOME: Improvement from Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome
Scale (PANSS)

   SECONDARY OUTCOME: Changes in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S)

TREATMENTS: Sublingual asenapine titrated from 1 mg b.i.d. day 1, increasing 1 mg b.i.d
to reach 5 mg b.i.d at day 5 (plus oral placebo). Continued at 5 mg b.i.d.

Oral risperidone titrated from 1mg b.i.d day 1, increasing 1 mg b.i.d to reach 3 mg b.i.d
at day 3 (plus sublingual placebo). Continued at 3 mg b.i.d.

Placebo group received oral and sublingual placebo b.i.d.
Results
Table 1. Demographics and Baseline Clinical Characteristics
Characteristics                      Asenapine       Placebo         Risperidone
Intent-to-treat N                    58              60              56
Men, treated N (%)                   46 (7)          49 (79)         36 (61)
Mean age years (range)               38 (21-70)      42 (22-68)      43 (22-61)
Ethnicity white N (%)                25 (42)         20 (32)         25 (42)
          black N (%)                28 (47)         32 (52)         26 (44)
Paranoid diagnosis N (%)             50 (85)         60 (97)         50 (85)
Present episode < 1month N (%)       34 (58)         39 (63)         44 (75)
Present episode 1-6 months N (%)     21 (36)         16 (26)         11 (19)
Episodic with prominent
negative symptoms N (%)                    23 (39)         20 (32)         22 (37)
Continuous episodic with
 Prominent negative symptoms N (%)   11 (19)         9 (15)          10 (17)
 Absent, other pattern, other        25 (42)         33 (53)         27 (46)

Treated population N=180
Results
  Figure 1. Patient dispositiona
                                                                                             Randomly assigned (N=182)

     Asenapine 5 mg bid N=60                                                                  Risperidone 3 mg bid N=60                                         Placebo bid N=62

                       DC before treatment N=1                                                                              DC before treatment N=1
   N=60 Treated                                                                                   N=59 Treated                                                    N=62 Treated
                        DC N=32                                                                                             DC N=34                                                DC N=41
                        Lack of efficiency N=9                                                                              Lack of efficiency N=16                                Lack of efficiency N=18
                        Adverse effects N=6                                                                                 Adverse effects N=4                                    Adverse effects N=7
 N=27 (46%)             Other N=17                                                             N=25 (42%)                   Other N=14                           N=21 (34%)        Other N=16
 Completed Trial                                                                               Completed Trial                                                   Completed Trial
aNumber   of patients randomly assigned, treated and with completed treatment, with reasons for discontinuation (DC)



  Figure 2. Primary measure of efficacy in the intent-to-treat population: change from baseline in PANSS
  total score a                               Week
                                                                                                                                           ✻p <.05 asenapine vs placebo
                                       LSM Change From Baseline




                                                                                                                                           ⁑p ≤ .005 asenapine vs placebo
                                                                                                                                           ℇ p = 0.001 asenapine vs placebo



                                                                                         ✻



                                                                                                                        ℇ                   a The
                                                                                                     ℇ         ⁑
                                                                                                                                 ⁑               change from baseline in the total score
                                                                                                                                            on PANSS was determined at study end (6
                                                                                                                                            weeks) or end of treatment with last observed
                                                                  Asenapine                  Risperidone            Placebo
                                                                                                                                            data carried forward, using last square mean
                                                                  Baseline value 96.48       Baseline value 92.18   Baseline value 92.43    (LSM) and 2-factor analysis of variance
Results
                                   Figure 3. Secondary measure of efficacy in the intent-to-treat population a

                                A. Changes from baseline CGI-S scores                                       B. Changes from baseline PANSS positive symptom scores
                                                            Week                                                                                                      Week

                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ✻p < .05 asenapine vs placebo
     LSM Change From Baseline




                                                                                                             LSM Change From Baseline
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ✝p ≤ .01 asenapine vs placebo
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ⁑p ≤ 0.005 asenapine vs placebo
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ‖p < 0.05 asenapine vs placebo
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ¶ p < 0.01 asenapine vs placebo
                                                 ‖                                                                                                                                                               # p < 0.005 asenapine vs placebo
                                                                                                                                                   ‖



                                                                                                                                                                         ‖
                                                                                                                                                                                            ‖
                                                                                          ¶                                                                                                           ‖
                                                                                                    #
                                                                                ‖
                                                                                                                                                                         ⁑         ⁑
                                                                                          ✝         ✝                                                                                       ⁑         ✝
                                                                                ✻
                                   Asenapine              Risperidone               Placebo                                             Asenapine                  Risperidone            Placebo
                                   Baseline value 4.67    Baseline value 4.59       Baseline value 4.59                                 Baseline value 25.21       Baseline value 24.70   Baseline value 24.12



C. Changes from baseline PANSS negative symptom scores                                                      D. Changes from baseline PANSS general psychopathology scores
                                                            Week                                                                                                      Week

                                                                                                                                                                                                                 a The changes from baseline
 LSM Change From Baseline




                                                                                                             LSM Change From Baseline



                                                                                                                                                                                                                 in scores on A, B, C, and D
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 were determined at study
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 end or end of treatment,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 using last square mean
                                                                                                                                                               ✻                                                 (LSM) and 2-factor analysis
                                                                                                                                                                                                                 of variance
                                                                                      ✝         ✝
                                                                ✻
                                                                          ✻                                                                                                                 ⁑         ⁑
                                                                                                                                                                         ⁑         ✝


                                   Asenapine              Risperidone               Placebo                                             Asenapine                  Risperidone            Placebo
                                   Baseline value 24.07   Baseline value 21.86      Baseline value 23.10                                Baseline value 47.21       Baseline value 45.63   Baseline value 45.22
Results
  Table 2. Incidence of adverse events in ≥ 10%                   Table 3. Changec from baseline to end point
  of patients in any treatment group                              in mean scores on extrapyramidal symptom
WHOa preferred      Patients N (%)b                               rating instruments
term           Asenapine Placebo                  Risperidone                       Asenapine        Placebo       Risperidone
Insomnia              11(19)        8 (13)        13(22)
                                                                                    (N=56-57)       (N=59-60)        (N=56)
Somnolence            11(19)        8 (13)        9 (15)
Nausea                11 (19)       8 (13)        7 (12)        RATING SCALE        BL Change BL Change BL Change
Anxiety               10 (17)       9 (15)        9 (15)        BAS                 1.00    -0.21 0.53      0.25 0.68       0.14
Agitation             9 (15)        15 (24)       11 (19)       SAS                 1.11     -0.32 0.64     -0.24 0.75      0.05
Headache              8 (14)        17 (27)       13 (22)       AIMS                1.05      0.04 0.93     0.46 1.36       -0.02
Vomiting              8 (14)        7 (11)        3 (5)
Constipation          6 (10)        6 (10)        4 (7)
                                                                 C Negativechange indicates improvement
Psychosis             6 (10)        4 (6)         4 (7)
                                                                 Abbreviations: BL= Baseline. BAS=Barnes Akathisia Scale.
Dizziness             5 (8)         9 (15)        4 (7)
                                                                 SAS=Simpson-Angus Scale. AIMS=Abnormal involuntary
Dyspepsia             4 (7)         5 (8)         7 (12)
                                                                 Movement Scale
Upper respiratory
Tract infection       4 (7)         3 (5)         6 (10)
Pain                  3 (5)         4 (6)         6 (10)
Fatigue               2 (3)         4 (6)         6 (10)
Hypertonia            0 (0)         2 (3)         7 (12)

a World   Health organization
b Adverse  effects not mutually exclusive between groups
Results
Figure 4. Treatment effects on body weighta                                                            Figure 5. Treatment effects on serum prolactina
      (≥ 7% ) weight gain (% of patients)
      Incidence of clinically significant




                                                                                                            Mean change from baseline (μg/L)
                                                                                               A




                                               Asenapine           Risperidone         Placebo
                                            (5 mg bid) (N=46)   (3 mg bid) (N=47)   (bid) (N=54)                                                           Week
                                                                                                                                               Asenapine       Risperidone   Placebo



                                                                                                                                      aProlactine levels assessed at weekly intervals
                                                                                                   B
              Mean weight gain (Kg)




                                                                                                                                      to study end (6 weeks) or end of treatment
                                                                                                                                      (last observation carried forward)




                                                  Asenapine        Risperidone      Placebo



              a Effectson body weight were assessed at study end or
              at end of treatment in terms of (A) incidence of clinical
              significant weight gain (≥ 7% increase from baseline) and
              (B) actual mean weight gain
Conclusions
1. Asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. was superior to placebo in treating the positive
and negative symptoms of schizophrenia.

2. Ripseridone 3 mg b.i.d. was only superior to placebo in positive
symptoms score, not in negative symptoms.

3. Incidence of clinically significant weight gain was similar for asenapine
and placebo. Asenapine and placebo had similar effects on
prolactinelevation. Risperidone had a higher incidence of weight gain and
on levels of prolactincompared to placebo.

4. Asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. was effective and well tolerated in the treatment
of acute schizophrenia and may be a useful option in patients with
negative symptoms.

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot
2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot
2024 State of Marketing Report – by HubspotMarius Sescu
 
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPT
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPTEverything You Need To Know About ChatGPT
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPTExpeed Software
 
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage Engineerings
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage EngineeringsProduct Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage Engineerings
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage EngineeringsPixeldarts
 
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental Health
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental HealthHow Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental Health
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental HealthThinkNow
 
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdf
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdfAI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdf
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdfmarketingartwork
 
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024Neil Kimberley
 
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)contently
 
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024Albert Qian
 
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie Insights
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie InsightsSocial Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie Insights
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie InsightsKurio // The Social Media Age(ncy)
 
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024Search Engine Journal
 
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summarySpeakerHub
 
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd Clark Boyd
 
Getting into the tech field. what next
Getting into the tech field. what next Getting into the tech field. what next
Getting into the tech field. what next Tessa Mero
 
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search Intent
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search IntentGoogle's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search Intent
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search IntentLily Ray
 
Time Management & Productivity - Best Practices
Time Management & Productivity -  Best PracticesTime Management & Productivity -  Best Practices
Time Management & Productivity - Best PracticesVit Horky
 
The six step guide to practical project management
The six step guide to practical project managementThe six step guide to practical project management
The six step guide to practical project managementMindGenius
 
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...RachelPearson36
 

Destaque (20)

2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot
2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot
2024 State of Marketing Report – by Hubspot
 
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPT
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPTEverything You Need To Know About ChatGPT
Everything You Need To Know About ChatGPT
 
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage Engineerings
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage EngineeringsProduct Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage Engineerings
Product Design Trends in 2024 | Teenage Engineerings
 
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental Health
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental HealthHow Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental Health
How Race, Age and Gender Shape Attitudes Towards Mental Health
 
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdf
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdfAI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdf
AI Trends in Creative Operations 2024 by Artwork Flow.pdf
 
Skeleton Culture Code
Skeleton Culture CodeSkeleton Culture Code
Skeleton Culture Code
 
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024
PEPSICO Presentation to CAGNY Conference Feb 2024
 
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)
Content Methodology: A Best Practices Report (Webinar)
 
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024
How to Prepare For a Successful Job Search for 2024
 
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie Insights
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie InsightsSocial Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie Insights
Social Media Marketing Trends 2024 // The Global Indie Insights
 
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024
Trends In Paid Search: Navigating The Digital Landscape In 2024
 
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary
5 Public speaking tips from TED - Visualized summary
 
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd
ChatGPT and the Future of Work - Clark Boyd
 
Getting into the tech field. what next
Getting into the tech field. what next Getting into the tech field. what next
Getting into the tech field. what next
 
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search Intent
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search IntentGoogle's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search Intent
Google's Just Not That Into You: Understanding Core Updates & Search Intent
 
How to have difficult conversations
How to have difficult conversations How to have difficult conversations
How to have difficult conversations
 
Introduction to Data Science
Introduction to Data ScienceIntroduction to Data Science
Introduction to Data Science
 
Time Management & Productivity - Best Practices
Time Management & Productivity -  Best PracticesTime Management & Productivity -  Best Practices
Time Management & Productivity - Best Practices
 
The six step guide to practical project management
The six step guide to practical project managementThe six step guide to practical project management
The six step guide to practical project management
 
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
Beginners Guide to TikTok for Search - Rachel Pearson - We are Tilt __ Bright...
 

Asenapine In Schizophrenia

  • 1. Efficacy and Tolerability of Asenapine in Acute Schizophrenia: A placebo and Risperidone-Controlled Trial Potkin, S., Cohen, M. Panagides, J. Dep. Psychiatry and Human Behavior, University of California, Irvine. Brain Imaging Center, Irvine
  • 2. Summary OBJECTIVE: To asses the efficacy, tolerability and safety of the investigational psychopharmacologic agent asenapine versus placebo in patients with acute schizophrenia RATIONALE: There is not current adequate pharmacologic control for the full range of symptoms in schizophrenia. RESULTS: Asenapine treatment produced statistically significant greater improvement scores in positive and negative schizophrenic symptoms compared with placebo. Furthermore, it was well tolerated and was not associated with weight gain or prolactin elevation.
  • 3. Introduction Asenapine is a novel atypical psychopharmacologic agent in clinical development for treatment for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Effectiveness of antipsychotic agents is measured against controlling positive symptoms and prevention or delay in relapse. All psychopharmacologic agent ameliorate positive symptoms to varying degree but not completely.  There is not adequate or consistent control of negative symptoms Asenapine modulates activity at dopamine D2 receptors to control positive symptoms of schizophrenia. Asenapine shows almost not affinity for muscarinic receptors and have minimal risks of anticholinergic side effects. Atypical antipsychotics adverse effects include weight gain, diabetes, dyslipidemia, sexual dysfunction, sedation, and others. The unusual pharmacologic characteristics of asenapine may contribute to a favorable clinical profile in controlling schizophrenia with a high degree of safety and tolerability
  • 4. Methods TRIAL DESIGN: Treatment randomly assigned. Double blind, double-dummy, 3-arm, fixed dose, 6-week, placebo and risperidone-controlled. Institution’s ethics committee or review board-approved PATIENT ELIGIBILITY: ≥ 18 years old. Schizophrenia diagnosis within the disorganized, paranoid, catatonic or undifferentiated subtypes PRIMARY OUTCOME: Improvement from Baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS)  SECONDARY OUTCOME: Changes in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) TREATMENTS: Sublingual asenapine titrated from 1 mg b.i.d. day 1, increasing 1 mg b.i.d to reach 5 mg b.i.d at day 5 (plus oral placebo). Continued at 5 mg b.i.d. Oral risperidone titrated from 1mg b.i.d day 1, increasing 1 mg b.i.d to reach 3 mg b.i.d at day 3 (plus sublingual placebo). Continued at 3 mg b.i.d. Placebo group received oral and sublingual placebo b.i.d.
  • 5. Results Table 1. Demographics and Baseline Clinical Characteristics Characteristics Asenapine Placebo Risperidone Intent-to-treat N 58 60 56 Men, treated N (%) 46 (7) 49 (79) 36 (61) Mean age years (range) 38 (21-70) 42 (22-68) 43 (22-61) Ethnicity white N (%) 25 (42) 20 (32) 25 (42) black N (%) 28 (47) 32 (52) 26 (44) Paranoid diagnosis N (%) 50 (85) 60 (97) 50 (85) Present episode < 1month N (%) 34 (58) 39 (63) 44 (75) Present episode 1-6 months N (%) 21 (36) 16 (26) 11 (19) Episodic with prominent negative symptoms N (%) 23 (39) 20 (32) 22 (37) Continuous episodic with Prominent negative symptoms N (%) 11 (19) 9 (15) 10 (17) Absent, other pattern, other 25 (42) 33 (53) 27 (46) Treated population N=180
  • 6. Results Figure 1. Patient dispositiona Randomly assigned (N=182) Asenapine 5 mg bid N=60 Risperidone 3 mg bid N=60 Placebo bid N=62 DC before treatment N=1 DC before treatment N=1 N=60 Treated N=59 Treated N=62 Treated DC N=32 DC N=34 DC N=41 Lack of efficiency N=9 Lack of efficiency N=16 Lack of efficiency N=18 Adverse effects N=6 Adverse effects N=4 Adverse effects N=7 N=27 (46%) Other N=17 N=25 (42%) Other N=14 N=21 (34%) Other N=16 Completed Trial Completed Trial Completed Trial aNumber of patients randomly assigned, treated and with completed treatment, with reasons for discontinuation (DC) Figure 2. Primary measure of efficacy in the intent-to-treat population: change from baseline in PANSS total score a Week ✻p <.05 asenapine vs placebo LSM Change From Baseline ⁑p ≤ .005 asenapine vs placebo ℇ p = 0.001 asenapine vs placebo ✻ ℇ a The ℇ ⁑ ⁑ change from baseline in the total score on PANSS was determined at study end (6 weeks) or end of treatment with last observed Asenapine Risperidone Placebo data carried forward, using last square mean Baseline value 96.48 Baseline value 92.18 Baseline value 92.43 (LSM) and 2-factor analysis of variance
  • 7. Results Figure 3. Secondary measure of efficacy in the intent-to-treat population a A. Changes from baseline CGI-S scores B. Changes from baseline PANSS positive symptom scores Week Week ✻p < .05 asenapine vs placebo LSM Change From Baseline LSM Change From Baseline ✝p ≤ .01 asenapine vs placebo ⁑p ≤ 0.005 asenapine vs placebo ‖p < 0.05 asenapine vs placebo ¶ p < 0.01 asenapine vs placebo ‖ # p < 0.005 asenapine vs placebo ‖ ‖ ‖ ¶ ‖ # ‖ ⁑ ⁑ ✝ ✝ ⁑ ✝ ✻ Asenapine Risperidone Placebo Asenapine Risperidone Placebo Baseline value 4.67 Baseline value 4.59 Baseline value 4.59 Baseline value 25.21 Baseline value 24.70 Baseline value 24.12 C. Changes from baseline PANSS negative symptom scores D. Changes from baseline PANSS general psychopathology scores Week Week a The changes from baseline LSM Change From Baseline LSM Change From Baseline in scores on A, B, C, and D were determined at study end or end of treatment, using last square mean ✻ (LSM) and 2-factor analysis of variance ✝ ✝ ✻ ✻ ⁑ ⁑ ⁑ ✝ Asenapine Risperidone Placebo Asenapine Risperidone Placebo Baseline value 24.07 Baseline value 21.86 Baseline value 23.10 Baseline value 47.21 Baseline value 45.63 Baseline value 45.22
  • 8. Results Table 2. Incidence of adverse events in ≥ 10% Table 3. Changec from baseline to end point of patients in any treatment group in mean scores on extrapyramidal symptom WHOa preferred Patients N (%)b rating instruments term Asenapine Placebo Risperidone Asenapine Placebo Risperidone Insomnia 11(19) 8 (13) 13(22) (N=56-57) (N=59-60) (N=56) Somnolence 11(19) 8 (13) 9 (15) Nausea 11 (19) 8 (13) 7 (12) RATING SCALE BL Change BL Change BL Change Anxiety 10 (17) 9 (15) 9 (15) BAS 1.00 -0.21 0.53 0.25 0.68 0.14 Agitation 9 (15) 15 (24) 11 (19) SAS 1.11 -0.32 0.64 -0.24 0.75 0.05 Headache 8 (14) 17 (27) 13 (22) AIMS 1.05 0.04 0.93 0.46 1.36 -0.02 Vomiting 8 (14) 7 (11) 3 (5) Constipation 6 (10) 6 (10) 4 (7) C Negativechange indicates improvement Psychosis 6 (10) 4 (6) 4 (7) Abbreviations: BL= Baseline. BAS=Barnes Akathisia Scale. Dizziness 5 (8) 9 (15) 4 (7) SAS=Simpson-Angus Scale. AIMS=Abnormal involuntary Dyspepsia 4 (7) 5 (8) 7 (12) Movement Scale Upper respiratory Tract infection 4 (7) 3 (5) 6 (10) Pain 3 (5) 4 (6) 6 (10) Fatigue 2 (3) 4 (6) 6 (10) Hypertonia 0 (0) 2 (3) 7 (12) a World Health organization b Adverse effects not mutually exclusive between groups
  • 9. Results Figure 4. Treatment effects on body weighta Figure 5. Treatment effects on serum prolactina (≥ 7% ) weight gain (% of patients) Incidence of clinically significant Mean change from baseline (μg/L) A Asenapine Risperidone Placebo (5 mg bid) (N=46) (3 mg bid) (N=47) (bid) (N=54) Week Asenapine Risperidone Placebo aProlactine levels assessed at weekly intervals B Mean weight gain (Kg) to study end (6 weeks) or end of treatment (last observation carried forward) Asenapine Risperidone Placebo a Effectson body weight were assessed at study end or at end of treatment in terms of (A) incidence of clinical significant weight gain (≥ 7% increase from baseline) and (B) actual mean weight gain
  • 10. Conclusions 1. Asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. was superior to placebo in treating the positive and negative symptoms of schizophrenia. 2. Ripseridone 3 mg b.i.d. was only superior to placebo in positive symptoms score, not in negative symptoms. 3. Incidence of clinically significant weight gain was similar for asenapine and placebo. Asenapine and placebo had similar effects on prolactinelevation. Risperidone had a higher incidence of weight gain and on levels of prolactincompared to placebo. 4. Asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. was effective and well tolerated in the treatment of acute schizophrenia and may be a useful option in patients with negative symptoms.

Notas do Editor

  1. ineligible patients were those with active suicidal state. Diagnosis of residual state schizophrenia, schizopreniform disorder or schizoaffective disorder. Breastfeeding women, pregnant or at risk of being pregnant. Patients that took any experimental medication within 30 days before baseline or had untreated or clinical significant rectal, endocrine, hepatic, respiratory, hematologic, immunologic, malignant or cardiovascular disease. Also patients with neurological illnesses or previously exposed to asenapine.
  2. Treated population N=180. Intent-to-treat (ITT) N=174. Finished trial N=73.The percentage of patients that completed the trial was higher for Asenapine (46%) and Risperidone (42%) groups compared with placebo (34%) group. A high drop out rate for all groups (54% for Asenapine, 66% for placebo and 58% for risperidone)Incidence of withdrawal due to lack of efficacy was lower for asenapine. Incidence of withdrawal due to adverse effects was similar for asenapine (10% of treated patients, 19 withdrawals), placebo (11% and 17%) and risperidone (7% and 12%)
  3. Table 3 shows no difference between treatments in the different scores.
  4. A limitation to this study is the high incidence of discontinuance (59.3 % in average all groups). This might be due to a fixed dose and not a flexible dose, that permits adjustment based on clinical effects. This also reflects the high rates of discontinuance characteristics of drug trials in schizophrenic patients.