METHODS: A prospective study was performed for a period of 1 year among 180 newly diagnosed schizophrenics, aged 20-60 years to observe the symptoms, medication adherence and side effects. Morisky-Green-Levine Scale was used to evaluate medication adherence, LUNSER for side effects and PANSS to measure positive and negative symptoms. Data were analyzed using SPSS.
RESULTS: Positive symptoms (Male: Baseline 36.14 vs. endpoint 23.58, Female: 35.29 vs. 23.74) and negative symptoms (Males 27.9 vs. 20.05, Females 28.41 vs. 20.2) of schizophrenia were equally reduced after a follow up of 1 year in both the genders. Male population suffered more accumulative side effects (11.4 in males vs. 6.40 in females), extrapyramidal symptoms such as tardive dyskinesia and tremors (1.21 in males vs. 0.57 in females) and other side effects as compared to women (p ≤ .005). Males were found poorly adherent to antipsychotic treatment than females (93.3% in males vs. 6.7% in females (p ≤ .005).
CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing practices should not overlook sex specific factors like hormonal changes, altered brain morphology and socioeconomic factors that may be responsible for the difference in the response to the course of schizophrenia.
METHODS: This is a naturalistic study conducted in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. Patients with first-episode schizophrenia and related psychosis were recruited from Kuala Lumpur Hospital. WHOQOL-BREF, side effects of medications and other variables were assessed after 1 year of treatment in routine clinical situation.
RESULTS: The study comprised 120 adults. There were no significant statistical differences between groups concerning subjective quality of life, extrapyramidal side effects and employment. Significant less benzhexol usage was reported among AAs (P<0.001) compared to CAs and sulpiride.
CONCLUSION: Patients treated with CAs, sulpiride or AAs experienced similar quality of life, clinical and health outcomes after 1 year commencing treatment. Overall, the results are in line with other major pragmatic clinical trials. This study also found sulpiride cost-effective.
METHODS AND MATERIALS: This study has retrospectively compared the healthcare utilization and associated costs of pre- and post-PPIM treatment in 413 patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder recruited from three major public hospitals providing psychiatric services in Hong Kong. Patients were categorized into early treatment (≤3 years since diagnosis) and chronic (>3 years) groups, and also whether they were receiving polypharmacy (POP).
RESULTS: It was found that patients who were started on early therapy with no POP had the most favourable outcomes. Overall results of the entire cohort, including both early and late treatments, indicate that there was a slight increase in annual in-patient days (IP) per patient and outpatient visit (OP) by 3.18 and 1.87, respectively, and a decrease in emergency room visit (ER) of 0.9 (p
METHODS: This cross-sectional survey across 15 Asian countries/territories collected socio-demographic and clinical data with standardized procedures between March and May 2016. The socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the patients were recorded with a standardized questionnaire.
RESULTS: Altogether 3,537 adult patients with schizophrenia were consecutively screened and enrolled in the survey. The mean age was 38.66 ± 11.55 years and 59.7% of the sample were male. The mean dose of antipsychotics in chlorpromazine equivalents (CPZeq) was 424 ± 376 mg/day; 31.3% and 80.8% received first- and second- generation antipsychotics, respectively and 42.6% had antipsychotic polypharmacy, 11.7% had antidepressants, 13.7% had mood stabilizers, 27.8% had benzodiazepines, and 45.6% had anticholinergics.
CONCLUSIONS: Psychotropic prescription patterns in Asian adult patients with schizophrenia varied across countries. Regular surveys on psychotropic medications for schizophrenia are important to monitor pharmacotherapy practice in Asia.
METHODS: This study was based on the fourth survey of the consortium known as the Research on Asian Psychotropic Prescription Pattern for Antipsychotics. Fifteen Asian countries/territories participated in this survey, including Bangladesh, Mainland China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Myanmar, Pakistan, Singapore, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam. Basic demographic and clinical characteristics were collected using a standardized data collection form.
RESULTS: Among the 879 older adults with schizophrenia included in the survey, the rate of APP was 40.5%. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that higher antipsychotic doses (P < .001, odds ratio [OR] = 1.003, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.002-1.003), longer duration of illness (P = .02, OR = 1.845, 95% CI: 1.087-3.132), and the prescription of anticholinergics (P < .001, OR = 1.871, 95% CI: 1.329-2.635), second-generation antipsychotics (P = .001, OR = 2.264, 95% CI: 1.453-3.529), and first-generation antipsychotics (P < .001, OR = 3.344, 95% CI: 2.307-4.847) were significantly associated with APP.
CONCLUSION: Antipsychotic polypharmacy was common in older adult Asian patients with schizophrenia. Compared to the results of previous surveys, the use of APP showed a declining trend over time. Considering the general poor health status of older patients with schizophrenia and their increased risk of drug-induced adverse events, the use of APP in this population needs careful consideration.
METHODS: This was an open-label, prospective, observational study involving 339 patients from Indonesia, Pakistan, Malaysia, Thailand, and Singapore. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Clinical Global Impression Severity scale (CGI-S), and safety parameters were assessed.
RESULTS: 62% of patients responded to olanzapine treatment, defined a priori as a reduction in BPRS of > 40% from baseline. Following the 8-week treatment period, the BPRS total, BPRS positive, BPRS negative, and CGI-S scores decreased by 18.7 (95% CI: 17.4, 20.2), 6.1 (5.6, 6.6), 2.9 (2.6, 3.2), and 1.5 points (median 1.0), respectively (p < 0.0001). In total, 31 of the 339 patients (9.1%) failed to complete the study according to the study description. Loss to follow-up and personal conflict were the most common reasons for discontinuation. There were 30 treatment-emergent adverse events with six serious cases, assessed as unrelated to study drug, reported.
CONCLUSION: This study further demonstrates the effectiveness and safety of olanzapine in actual clinical practice settings, in reducing the severity of psychopathological symptoms in Asian patients with schizophrenia.
METHODS: Patients (N = 281) with schizophrenia who had completed a randomized, double-blind (DB), 6-week comparison of lurasidone (40 and 80 mg/day) and placebo were enrolled in a 26-week extension study in which all patients received open-label (OL), flexible doses of lurasidone (40 or 80 mg/day). Effectiveness was measured using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven percent of patients completed the OL extension study; 16.7% discontinued early due to lack of effectiveness; and 10.3% due to adverse events. The most common adverse events were insomnia (11.3%), akathisia (11.0%), and nasopharyngitis (10.6%). Adverse events related to weight gain, metabolic parameters, prolactin, and ECG measures were uncommon. Mean change in the PANSS total score from the DB baseline to OL endpoint was -28.4, with mean improvement of -7.5 observed from baseline to OL endpoint, and with a PANSS responder rate of 73.7%.
DISCUSSION: The results of the current 26-week extension study found lurasidone to be a generally safe, well-tolerated, and effective long-term treatment for schizophrenia in Asian patients.
METHODS: Patients with schizophrenia from Japan, South Korea, Malaysia, and Taiwan were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with 40 or 80 mg/d of lurasidone or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline to week 6 on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. Efficacy was evaluated using a mixed-model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population.
RESULTS: On the basis of the analysis for the mITT population, the estimated difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -4.8 (P = 0.050) and -4.2 (P = 0.080). For the full intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the difference score for lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d vs placebo was -5.8 (P = 0.017) and -4.2 (P = 0.043). The most frequent adverse events in the lurasidone 40 and 80 mg/d and placebo groups, respectively, were akathisia (7.3%, 10.4%, 3.3%), somnolence (6.0%, 2.6%, 0.7%), and vomiting (6.0%, 5.8%, 2.0%). The proportion of patients experiencing clinically significant weight gain (≥7%) was 5.3% for lurasidone 40 mg/d, 1.3% for 80 mg/d, and 1.4% for placebo. End point changes in metabolic parameters and prolactin were comparable for both lurasidone groups and placebo.
CONCLUSIONS: In the ITT (but not the mITT) population, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement in the PANSS total score in patients with schizophrenia. Lurasidone was generally well tolerated with minimal impact on weight and metabolic parameters.