TY - JOUR
T1 - Lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine extended-release for bipolar depression
T2 - A systematic review and network meta-analysis of phase 3 trials in Japan
AU - Kishi, Taro
AU - Yoshimura, Reiji
AU - Sakuma, Kenji
AU - Okuya, Makoto
AU - Iwata, Nakao
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors. Neuropsychopharmacology Reports published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of The Japanese Society of Neuropsycho Pharmacology
PY - 2020/12
Y1 - 2020/12
N2 - Aim: This systematic review and random-effect model, network meta-analysis of the phase 3 trials in Japan assessed the efficacy and safety profile of lurasidone compared with olanzapine and quetiapine extended-release (QUE-XR) for the treatment of bipolar depression. Methods: The study included double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials in Japan that included patients with bipolar depression. Outcomes included response rate (primary), remission rate (secondary), improvement of Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, discontinuation rates, and incidence of individual adverse events. Results: Three studies were included (n = 1223). Lurasidone and olanzapine but not QUE-XR were superior to placebo in response rate [risk ratio (95% credible interval): lurasidone = 0.78 (0.66, 0.92); olanzapine = 0.84 (0.71, 0.99); QUE-XR = 0.87 (0.73, 1.03)]. Lurasidone, olanzapine and QUE-XR were superior to placebo in remission rate [lurasidone = 0.90 (0.83, 0.98); olanzapine = 0.87 (0.77, 0.99); QUE-XR = 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)] and the improvement of MADRS total score. There were not differences in discontinuation rates between each antipsychotic and placebo. Compared with placebo, lurasidone was higher incidence of akathisia, and increased body weight and blood prolactin level; olanzapine was higher incidence of somnolence and ≥7% weight gain, and increased body weight, blood total cholesterol level, blood LDL cholesterol level, and blood triglyceride levels; QUE-XR was higher incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, somnolence, dry mouth, constipation and ≥7% weight gain, and increased body weight, blood total cholesterol level, blood LDL cholesterol level, and blood triglyceride levels. Conclusions: Our results suggested although the efficacy of three SGAs was similar, there were the differences in the safety profile among the SGAs.
AB - Aim: This systematic review and random-effect model, network meta-analysis of the phase 3 trials in Japan assessed the efficacy and safety profile of lurasidone compared with olanzapine and quetiapine extended-release (QUE-XR) for the treatment of bipolar depression. Methods: The study included double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials in Japan that included patients with bipolar depression. Outcomes included response rate (primary), remission rate (secondary), improvement of Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, discontinuation rates, and incidence of individual adverse events. Results: Three studies were included (n = 1223). Lurasidone and olanzapine but not QUE-XR were superior to placebo in response rate [risk ratio (95% credible interval): lurasidone = 0.78 (0.66, 0.92); olanzapine = 0.84 (0.71, 0.99); QUE-XR = 0.87 (0.73, 1.03)]. Lurasidone, olanzapine and QUE-XR were superior to placebo in remission rate [lurasidone = 0.90 (0.83, 0.98); olanzapine = 0.87 (0.77, 0.99); QUE-XR = 0.84 (0.73, 0.98)] and the improvement of MADRS total score. There were not differences in discontinuation rates between each antipsychotic and placebo. Compared with placebo, lurasidone was higher incidence of akathisia, and increased body weight and blood prolactin level; olanzapine was higher incidence of somnolence and ≥7% weight gain, and increased body weight, blood total cholesterol level, blood LDL cholesterol level, and blood triglyceride levels; QUE-XR was higher incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, somnolence, dry mouth, constipation and ≥7% weight gain, and increased body weight, blood total cholesterol level, blood LDL cholesterol level, and blood triglyceride levels. Conclusions: Our results suggested although the efficacy of three SGAs was similar, there were the differences in the safety profile among the SGAs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090444045&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85090444045&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1002/npr2.12137
DO - 10.1002/npr2.12137
M3 - Article
C2 - 32902200
AN - SCOPUS:85090444045
SN - 1340-2544
VL - 40
SP - 417
EP - 422
JO - Neuropsychopharmacology reports
JF - Neuropsychopharmacology reports
IS - 4
ER -