Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T12:30:25.487Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

2281 – Psychosocial And Overall Effectiveness Of Aripiprazole Once-monthly Vs. Placebo Once-monthly For Maintenance Treatment In Schizophrenia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 April 2020

R. Baker
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ
W.H. Carson
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ
P. Perry
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ
R. Sanchez
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ
N. Jin
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc., Rockville, MD
R.D. McQuade
Affiliation:
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development and Commercialization, Inc., Princeton, NJ
J. Kane
Affiliation:
The Zucker Hillside Hospital, Glen Oaks Hofstra North Shore-LIJ School of Medicine, Hempstead, NY, USA
W.W. Fleischhacker
Affiliation:
Medical University Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.
Objective

Evaluate the effectiveness of investigational aripiprazole once-monthly (ARI-OM) for maintenance treatment in schizophrenia.

Methods

Detailed methodology has been published previously1. Briefly, the study consisted of 4 phases: oral conversion to aripiprazole (Phase 1); oral aripiprazole stabilization (Phase 2); ARI-OM stabilization (Phase 3), with co-administration of oral aripiprazole for the first 2 weeks; and an ARI-OM maintenance phase (Phase 4). Effectiveness assessments included Investigator's Assessment Questionnaire (IAQ) scores, a scale that evaluates effectiveness of current treatment vs. pre-trial medication, where a negative change in score signals improvement, and Personal and Social Performance (PSP) scale scores, where negative change in score signals worsening.

Results

710 patients entered Phase 2, 576 Phase 3 and 403 Phase 4 (ARI-OM=269, placebo once-monthly [placebo- OM]=134). Mean IAQ Total scores remained stable in Phase 2 (31.3) and Phase 3 (30.6). During Phase 4, the mean change in IAQ Total score was +1.3 for ARI-OM vs. +3.8 for placebo-OM (p< 0.0001). Mean changes in PSP Total scale scores showed improvement during Phase 2 (3.0) and Phase 3 (2.6). Mean change in PSP scores during Phase 4 showed greater functional stability with ARI-OM (−1.7) compared with placebo-OM (−6.2) (p=0.0002 vs. placebo-OM).

Conclusions

Improvements in effectiveness, as assessed by the IAQ and PSP Total scale scores, in the Phases 2 & 3 were maintained in Phase 4 for ARI-OM compared with placebo-OM. Treatment with ARI-OM improved symptoms, overall response to treatment and functioning.

Type
Abstract
Copyright
Copyright © European Psychiatric Association 2012

References

Kane, J., et al.J.Clin.Psychiatry 2012; 73: 6171–624Google Scholar
Submit a response

Comments

No Comments have been published for this article.