Quetiapine extended-release vs olanzapine for Japanese patients with bipolar depression: A Bayesian analysis

© 2019 The Authors. Neuropsychopharmacology Reports published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of the Japanese Society of NeuropsychoPharmacology. Objective: It is unknown whether there are differences in efficacy and safety between quetiapine extended-release, 300 mg/d (QUEXR300), and olanzapine, 5-20 mg/d (OLA), for Japanese patients with bipolar depression. Methods: We conducted a Bayesian analysis of data from phase 3 studies in Japan of QUEXR300 and OLA. Outcomes were remission rate (primary), response rate, improvement on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale scores, discontinuation rate, and incidence of individual adverse events. We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) and the risk ratio (RR) and 95% credible interval (95% CrI) for continuous and dichotomous data, respectively. Results: There were no significant differences between QUEXR300 and OLA for any of the efficacy outcomes. QUEXR300 was associated with a higher incidence of somnolence than OLA (RR = 5.517; 95% CrI = 1.563, 19.787), while OLA was associated with greater increase body weight (SMD = −0.488; 95% CrI = −0.881, −0.089) and blood prolactin levels (SMD = −0.642; 95% CrI = −1.073, −0.213) than QUEXR300, and a greater decrease in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels (SMD = −0.408; 95% CrI = −0.785, −0.030) than QUEXR300. Conclusion: Although the two drugs’ efficacy did not differ, OLA increased the risk of metabolic syndrome and QUEXR300 the risk of somnolence. A large scale, long-term, head-to-head comparison study of QUEXR300 vs OLA for Japanese patients with bipolar depression is needed to confirm the results of the current study

Mood stabilizers and/or antipsychotics for bipolar disorder in the maintenance phase: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

© 2020, The Author(s). We searched Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL from inception until 22 May 2020 to investigate which antipsychotics and/or mood stabilizers are better for patients with bipolar disorder in the maintenance phase. We performed two categorical network meta-analyses. The first included monotherapy studies and studies in which the two drugs used were specified (i.e., aripiprazole, aripiprazole once monthly, aripiprazole+lamotrigine, aripiprazole+valproate, asenapine, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, lamotrigine+valproate, lithium, lithium+oxcarbazepine, lithium+valproate, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone long-acting injection, valproate, and placebo). The second included studies on second-generation antipsychotic combination therapies (SGAs) (i.e., aripiprazole, lurasidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone) with lithium or valproate (LIT/VAL) compared with placebo with LIT/VAL. Outcomes were recurrence/relapse rate of any mood episode (RR-any, primary), depressive episode (RR-dep) and manic/hypomanic/mixed episode (RR-mania), discontinuation, mortality, and individual adverse events. Risk ratios and 95% credible interval were calculated. Forty-one randomized controlled trials were identified (n = 9821; mean study duration, 70.5 ± 36.6 weeks; percent female, 54.1%; mean age, 40.7 years). All active treatments other than carbamazepine, lamotrigine+valproate (no data) and paliperidone outperformed the placebo for RR-any. Aripiprazole+valproate, lamotrigine, lamotrigine+valproate, lithium, olanzapine, and quetiapine outperformed placebo for RR-dep. All active treatments, other than aripiprazole+valproate, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and lamotrigine+valproate, outperformed placebo for RR-mania. Asenapine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, and valproate outperformed placebo for all-cause discontinuation. All SGAs+LIT/VALs other than olanzapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-any. Lurasidone+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-dep. Aripiprazole+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-mania. Lurasidone+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for all-cause discontinuation. Treatment efficacy, tolerability, and safety profiles differed among treatments

Pharmacological treatment for bipolar mania: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind randomized controlled trials

A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of pharmacological interventions for adults with acute bipolar mania. We searched PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase databases for eligible studies published before March 14, 2021. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of oral medication monotherapy lasting ≥10 days in adults with mania were included, and studies that allowed the use of antipsychotics as a rescue medication during a trial were excluded. The primary outcomes were response to treatment (efficacy) and all-cause discontinuation (acceptability). The secondary outcomes were the improvement of mania symptoms and discontinuation due to inefficacy. Of the 79 eligible RCTs, 72 double-blind RCTs of 23 drugs and a placebo were included in the meta-analysis (mean study duration = 3.96 ± 2.39 weeks, n = 16442, mean age = 39.55 years, with 50.93% males). Compared with the placebo, aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone outperformed response to treatment (N = 56, n = 14503); aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone had lower all-cause discontinuation; however, topiramate had higher all-cause discontinuation (N = 70, n = 16324). Compared with the placebo, aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone outperformed the improvement of mania symptoms (N = 61, n = 15466), and aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone, valproate, and ziprasidone had lower discontinuation due to inefficacy (N = 50, n = 14284). In conclusions, these antipsychotics, carbamazepine, lithium, tamoxifen, and valproate were effective for acute mania. However, only aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone had better acceptability than the placebo

前立腺IMRTおよびVMATに及ぼす直腸ガスの線量影響

Purpose: In this study, we compared the dose impact of the heterogeneity caused by rectal gas using two methods of treatment planning for intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) and volumetric-modulated arc therapy (VMAT). Materials and Methods: In addition to the structure set used for the standard treatment plan, we created a structure set for evaluation for each patient. The structure sets for evaluation that were created were transferred to the same iso-center as the respective treatment plans for IMRT and VMAT that were to become the standard. The values were then re-calculated. Results: During the standard prostatic IMRT and VMAT treatment planning, all the subjects met the dose restrictions in place at our hospital. Dose restrictions were fulfilled in the treatment plans for evaluation, excluding those with a clinical target volume (CTV) of V100% and planning target volume (PTV) of D95 when the rectum was excluded. However, in treatment plans for evaluation, IMRT was shown to have a higher concordance rate with standard treatment plans than VMAT. Conclusion: If rectal gas is present during either IMRT or VMAT, a dose decrease will occur in relation to CTV and PTV, suggesting that a plan does not eliminate adverse effects on organs at risk

Helical tomotherapy for asymptomatic chemotherapy-refractory or -unfit multiple (3 or more) metastases

Background: Despite chemotherapy innovations, prognosis of patients with chemotherapy-refractory or -unfit multiple metastases (CRMM/CUMM) remains poor. In this prospective study, the efficacy and toxicity of helical tomotherapy for CRMM/CUMM were evaluated. Materials and methods: Between 2014 and 2020, asymptomatic patients with CRMM/CUMM with ≥ 3 lesions and no prior radiotherapy of the targets were enrolled. Patients who had intolerable toxicities to chemotherapy and those who refused chemotherapy were included in the CRMM and CUMM groups, respectively. Prostate cancer patients and patients with metastases mainly localized in the liver, lung, or brain were excluded. By helical tomotherapy, up to 10 lesions per patient were irradiated in order of volume. The standard dose was 50–60 Gy in 25–30 fractions. Results: Forty-five patients (median age, 63 years; 35 CRMM/10 CUMM) were enrolled. Primary tumors included lung, gynecological, and gastrointestinal cancers. The most frequently treated targets were lymph node metastases, followed by peritoneal/pleural disseminations and bone tumors. The 1-year survival rate was 51% (median, 12.5 months). In the 35 patients with CRMM, the median survival time was 12.5 months, and the median pre-radiation chemotherapy period was 8.8 months (p > 0.05). The 6-month target control rate was 78%. Acute adverse events (grade ≥ 2) occurred in 33 patients: hematologic toxicities in 23, dermatitis in 6, and others in 8. Late grade ≥ 2 toxicities occurred in 6 patients: pneumonitis in 4 and gastric hemorrhage in 2. Conclusion: Tomotherapy for CRMM/CUMM resulted in median survival times > 1 year. This treatment should be investigated further in larger prospective studies