A Randomized Comparison of Aripiprazole and Risperidone for the Acute Treatment of First-Episode Schizophrenia and Related Disorders: 3-Month Outcomes

Research findings are particularly important for medication choice for first-episode patients as individual prior medication response to guide treatment decisions is unavailable. We describe the first large-scale double-masked randomized comparison with first-episode patients of aripiprazole and risperidone, 2 commonly used first-episode treatment agents. One hundred ninety-eight participants aged 15-40 years with schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, schizoaffective disorder or psychotic disorder Not Otherwise Specified, and who had been treated in their lifetime with antipsychotics for 2 weeks or less were randomly assigned to double-masked aripiprazole (5-30mg/d) or risperidone (1-6mg/d) and followed for 12 weeks. Positive symptom response rates did not differ (62.8% vs 56.8%) nor did time to response. Aripiprazole-treated participants had better negative symptom outcomes but experienced more akathisia. Body mass index change did not differ between treatments but advantages were found for aripiprazole treatment for total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, fasting glucose, and prolactin levels. Post hoc analyses suggested advantages for aripiprazole on depressed mood. Overall, if the potential for akathisia is a concern, low-dose risperidone as used in this trial maybe a preferred choice over aripiprazole. Otherwise, aripiprazole would be the preferred choice over risperidone in most situations based upon metabolic outcome advantages and some symptom advantages within the context of similar positive symptom response between medications

The impact of immediate breast reconstruction on the time to delivery of adjuvant therapy: the iBRA-2 study

Background: Immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) is routinely offered to improve quality-of-life for women requiring mastectomy, but there are concerns that more complex surgery may delay adjuvant oncological treatments and compromise long-term outcomes. High-quality evidence is lacking. The iBRA-2 study aimed to investigate the impact of IBR on time to adjuvant therapy. Methods: Consecutive women undergoing mastectomy ± IBR for breast cancer July–December, 2016 were included. Patient demographics, operative, oncological and complication data were collected. Time from last definitive cancer surgery to first adjuvant treatment for patients undergoing mastectomy ± IBR were compared and risk factors associated with delays explored. Results: A total of 2540 patients were recruited from 76 centres; 1008 (39.7%) underwent IBR (implant-only [n = 675, 26.6%]; pedicled flaps [n = 105,4.1%] and free-flaps [n = 228, 8.9%]). Complications requiring re-admission or re-operation were significantly more common in patients undergoing IBR than those receiving mastectomy. Adjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy was required by 1235 (48.6%) patients. No clinically significant differences were seen in time to adjuvant therapy between patient groups but major complications irrespective of surgery received were significantly associated with treatment delays. Conclusions: IBR does not result in clinically significant delays to adjuvant therapy, but post-operative complications are associated with treatment delays. Strategies to minimise complications, including careful patient selection, are required to improve outcomes for patients