Are trials of psychological and psychosocial interventions for schizophrenia and psychosis included in the NICE guidelines pragmatic? A systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: The NICE clinical guidelines on psychosocial interventions for the treatment of schizophrenia and psychosis in adults are based on the results of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which may not be studies with a pragmatic design, leading to uncertainty on applicability or recommendations to everyday clinical practice. AIM: To assess the level of pragmatism of the evidence used to develop the NICE guideline for psychosocial interventions in psychoses. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We conducted a systematic and critical appraisal of RCTs used to develop the 'psychological therapy and psychosocial interventions' section of the NICE guideline on the treatment and management of psychosis and schizophrenia in adults, published in 2014. For each study we assessed pragmatism using the pragmatic-explanatory continuum indicator summary-2 (PRECIS-2) and the Cochrane risk of bias tool. The mean score of PRECIS-2, averaging across nine domains, was calculated to describe the level of pragmatism of each individual study. RESULTS: A total of 143 studies were included in the analysis. Based on the PRECIS-2 tool, 16.8% were explanatory, 33.6% pragmatic, and 49.7% were rated in an intermediate category. Compared to explanatory studies, pragmatic studies showed a lower risk of bias. Additionally, pragmatism did not significantly improve over time, and no associations were found between pragmatism and a number of trial characteristics. However, studies with a UK leading investigator had the highest mean score of pragmatism. Cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), art therapy, family intervention, psychoeducation, and adherence therapy, showed the higher average pragmatism scores. CONCLUSIONS: Two third of studies used to produce NICE recommendations on psychosocial interventions for the treatment of schizophrenia and psychosis in adults are based on studies that did not employ a pragmatic design

Factors associated with first- versus second generation long-acting antipsychotics prescribed un-der ordinary clinical practice in Italy.

Background For many years, long-acting intramuscular (LAI) antipsychotics have been prescribed predominantly to chronic and severe patients, as a last resort when other treatments failed. Recently, a broader and earlier use of LAIs, particularly second-generation LAIs, has been emphasized. To date, few studies attempted to frame how this change in prescribing took place in real-world practice. Therefore, this study aimed to describe the clinical features of patients prescribed with LAIs, and to explore possible prescribing differences between first- and second-generations LAIs under ordinary clinical practice in Italy. Methods The STAR Network \u201cDepot\u201d Study is an observational, longitudinal, multicenter study involving 35 centers in Italy. In the cross-sectional phase, patients prescribed with LAIs were consecutively recruited and assessed over a period of 12 months. Descriptive statistics and multivariable logistic regression analyses were employed. Results Of the 451 recruited patients, 61% were males. The level of social and working functioning was heterogeneous, as was the severity of disease. Seventy-two per cent of the patients had a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum. Seventy per cent were prescribed with second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) LAIs (mostly paliperidone, aripiprazole and risperidone). Compared to first-generation antipsychotic (FGA) LAIs, patients prescribed with SGA LAIs were more often younger; employed; with a diagnosis of the schizophrenia spectrum or bipolar disorder; with higher levels of affective symptoms; with fewer LAI prescriptions in the past. Discussion LAIs' prescribing practices appear to be more flexible as compared to the past, although this change is mostly restricted to SGA LAI

Combinations of QT-prolonging drugs: towards disentangling pharmacokinetic and pharmaco-dynamic effects in their potentially additive nature.

Background: Whether arrhythmia risks will increase if drugs with electrocardiographic (ECG) QT-prolonging properties are combined is generally supposed but not well studied. Based on available evidence, the Arizona Center for Education and Research on Therapeutics (AZCERT) classification defines the risk of QT prolongation for exposure to single drugs. We aimed to investigate how combining AZCERT drug categories impacts QT duration and how relative drug exposure affects the extent of pharmacodynamic drug–drug interactions. Methods: In a cohort of 2558 psychiatric inpatients and outpatients, we modeled whether AZCERT class and number of coprescribed QT-prolonging drugs correlates with observed rate-corrected QT duration (QTc) while also considering age, sex, inpatient status, and other QTc-prolonging risk factors. We concurrently considered administered drug doses and pharmacokinetic interactions modulating drug clearance to calculate individual weights of relative exposure with AZCERT drugs. Because QTc duration is concentration-dependent, we estimated individual drug exposure with these drugs and included this information as weights in weighted regression analyses. Results: Drugs attributing a ‘known’ risk for clinical consequences were associated with the largest QTc prolongations. However, the presence of at least two versus one QTc-prolonging drug yielded nonsignificant prolongations [exposure-weighted parameter estimates with 95% confidence intervals for ‘known’ risk drugs + 0.93 ms (–8.88;10.75)]. Estimates for the ‘conditional’ risk class increased upon refinement with relative drug exposure and coadministration of a ‘known’ risk drug as a further risk factor. Conclusions: These observations indicate that indiscriminate combinations of QTc-prolonging drugs do not necessarily result in additive QTc prolongation and suggest that QT prolongation caused by drug combinations strongly depends on the nature of the combination partners and individual drug exposure. Concurrently, it stresses the value of the AZCERT classification also for the risk prediction of combination therapies with QT-prolonging drugs

Off–label long acting injectable antipsychotics in real–world clinical practice: a cross-sectional analysis of prescriptive patterns from the STAR Network DEPOT study

Introduction: Information on the off–label use of Long–Acting Injectable (LAI) antipsychotics in the real world is lacking. In this study, we aimed to identify the sociodemographic and clinical features of patients treated with on– vs off–label LAIs and predictors of off–label First– or Second–Generation Antipsychotic (FGA vs. SGA) LAI choice in everyday clinical practice. Method: In a naturalistic national cohort of 449 patients who initiated LAI treatment in the STAR Network Depot Study, two groups were identified based on off– or on–label prescriptions. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to test several clinically relevant variables and identify those associated with the choice of FGA vs SGA prescription in the off–label group. Results: SGA LAIs were more commonly prescribed in everyday practice, without significant differences in their on– and off–label use. Approximately 1 in 4 patients received an off–label prescription. In the off–label group, the most frequent diagnoses were bipolar disorder (67.5%) or any personality disorder (23.7%). FGA vs SGA LAI choice was significantly associated with BPRS thought disorder (OR = 1.22, CI95% 1.04 to 1.43, p = 0.015) and hostility/suspiciousness (OR = 0.83, CI95% 0.71 to 0.97, p = 0.017) dimensions. The likelihood of receiving an SGA LAI grew steadily with the increase of the BPRS thought disturbance score. Conversely, a preference towards prescribing an FGA was observed with higher scores at the BPRS hostility/suspiciousness subscale. Conclusion: Our study is the first to identify predictors of FGA vs SGA choice in patients treated with off–label LAI antipsychotics. Demographic characteristics, i.e. age, sex, and substance/alcohol use co–morbidities did not appear to influence the choice towards FGAs or SGAs. Despite a lack of evidence, clinicians tend to favour FGA over SGA LAIs in bipolar or personality disorder patients with relevant hostility. Further research is needed to evaluate treatment adherence and clinical effectiveness of these prescriptive patterns

Comparing Long-Acting Antipsychotic Discontinuation Rates Under Ordinary Clinical Circumstances: A Survival Analysis from an Observational, Pragmatic Study

Background: Recent guidelines suggested a wider use of long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAI) than previously, but naturalistic data on the consequences of LAI use in terms of discontinuation rates and associated factors are still sparse, making it hard for clinicians to be informed on plausible treatment courses. Objective: Our objective was to assess, under real-world clinical circumstances, LAI discontinuation rates over a period of 12 months after a first prescription, reasons for discontinuation, and associated factors. Methods: The STAR Network ‘Depot Study’ was a naturalistic, multicentre, observational prospective study that enrolled subjects initiating a LAI without restrictions on diagnosis, clinical severity or setting. Participants from 32 Italian centres were assessed at baseline and at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Psychopathology, drug attitude and treatment adherence were measured using the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Drug Attitude Inventory and the Kemp scale, respectively. Results: The study followed 394 participants for 12 months. The overall discontinuation rate at 12 months was 39.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] 34.4–44.3), with paliperidone LAI being the least discontinued LAI (33.9%; 95% CI 25.3–43.5) and olanzapine LAI the most discontinued (62.5%; 95% CI 35.4–84.8). The most frequent reason for discontinuation was onset of adverse events (32.9%; 95% CI 25.6–40.9) followed by participant refusal of the medication (20.6%; 95% CI 14.6–27.9). Medication adherence at baseline was negatively associated with discontinuation risk (hazard ratio [HR] 0.853; 95% CI 0.742–0.981; p = 0.026), whereas being prescribed olanzapine LAI was associated with increased discontinuation risk compared with being prescribed paliperidone LAI (HR 2.156; 95% CI 1.003–4.634; p = 0.049). Conclusions: Clinicians should be aware that LAI discontinuation is a frequent occurrence. LAI choice should be carefully discussed with the patient, taking into account individual characteristics and possible obstacles related to the practicalities of each formulation