Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of mirror-image studies

Taishiro Kishimoto, Masahiro Nitta, Michael Borenstein, John M. Kane, Christoph U. Correll

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

209 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Objective: Recent, large, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no benefit of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics over oral antipsychotics in preventing relapse in schizophrenia, nor did a recent meta-analysis incorporating these studies. However, RCTs might enroll a disproportionate number of patients with better treatment adherence and lower illness severity. Mirrorimage studies, which compare periods of oral antipsychotic versus LAI treatment in the same patients, might therefore better reflect the real-world impact of LAIs. Data Sources: A systematic literature search without language restriction was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL until May 31, 2012. Search terms included synonyms of (1) antipsychotic(s) AND (2) schizophrenia and related disorders AND (3) depot, (long-acting) injection(s), microsphere, decanoate, palmitate, enanthate. Study Selection: Of 5,483 identified citations, 607 articles were fully inspected, and 582 were ineligible. Finally, 25 mirror-image studies from 28 countries that followed 5,940 patients with schizophrenia for ≥ 12 months (≥ 6 months each on oral antipsychotic and LAI treatment) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Data Extraction: Coprimary outcomes were hospitalization risk and number of hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization days and length of stay. Data Synthesis: LAIs showed strong superiority over oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization (16 studies, N = 4,066; risk ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53; P < .001) and in decreasing the number of hospitalizations (15 studies, 6,342 person-years; rate ratio = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.28-0.51; P < .001). This strong advantage was also observed for secondary outcomes and in multiple clinically relevant subpopulations and treatment groups. Conclusions: Results from mirror-image studies in patients eligible for clinical use of LAIs showed strong superiority of LAIs compared to oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization. The results were in contrast to the recent meta-analysis of RCTs, which showed no superiority of LAIs. Given the possible biases in mirrorimage studies, such as expectation bias, natural illness course, and time effect, a cautious interpretation is required. Nevertheless, the population in mirror-image studies better reflects the population receiving LAIs in clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)957-965
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Clinical Psychiatry
Volume74
Issue number10
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 2013 Oct

Fingerprint

Antipsychotic Agents
Meta-Analysis
Schizophrenia
Hospitalization
Injections
Randomized Controlled Trials
Library Science
Heptanoates
Decanoates
Palmitates
Information Storage and Retrieval
Therapeutics
Systematic Review
Meta-analysis
Microspheres
PubMed
MEDLINE
Population
Length of Stay
Language

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health
  • Arts and Humanities (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia : A systematic review and meta-analysis of mirror-image studies. / Kishimoto, Taishiro; Nitta, Masahiro; Borenstein, Michael; Kane, John M.; Correll, Christoph U.

In: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, Vol. 74, No. 10, 10.2013, p. 957-965.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Kishimoto, Taishiro ; Nitta, Masahiro ; Borenstein, Michael ; Kane, John M. ; Correll, Christoph U. / Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia : A systematic review and meta-analysis of mirror-image studies. In: Journal of Clinical Psychiatry. 2013 ; Vol. 74, No. 10. pp. 957-965.
@article{a5401fb334e34a94a2561ad43bb9dfc4,
title = "Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of mirror-image studies",
abstract = "Objective: Recent, large, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no benefit of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics over oral antipsychotics in preventing relapse in schizophrenia, nor did a recent meta-analysis incorporating these studies. However, RCTs might enroll a disproportionate number of patients with better treatment adherence and lower illness severity. Mirrorimage studies, which compare periods of oral antipsychotic versus LAI treatment in the same patients, might therefore better reflect the real-world impact of LAIs. Data Sources: A systematic literature search without language restriction was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL until May 31, 2012. Search terms included synonyms of (1) antipsychotic(s) AND (2) schizophrenia and related disorders AND (3) depot, (long-acting) injection(s), microsphere, decanoate, palmitate, enanthate. Study Selection: Of 5,483 identified citations, 607 articles were fully inspected, and 582 were ineligible. Finally, 25 mirror-image studies from 28 countries that followed 5,940 patients with schizophrenia for ≥ 12 months (≥ 6 months each on oral antipsychotic and LAI treatment) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Data Extraction: Coprimary outcomes were hospitalization risk and number of hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization days and length of stay. Data Synthesis: LAIs showed strong superiority over oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization (16 studies, N = 4,066; risk ratio = 0.43; 95{\%} CI, 0.35-0.53; P < .001) and in decreasing the number of hospitalizations (15 studies, 6,342 person-years; rate ratio = 0.38; 95{\%} CI, 0.28-0.51; P < .001). This strong advantage was also observed for secondary outcomes and in multiple clinically relevant subpopulations and treatment groups. Conclusions: Results from mirror-image studies in patients eligible for clinical use of LAIs showed strong superiority of LAIs compared to oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization. The results were in contrast to the recent meta-analysis of RCTs, which showed no superiority of LAIs. Given the possible biases in mirrorimage studies, such as expectation bias, natural illness course, and time effect, a cautious interpretation is required. Nevertheless, the population in mirror-image studies better reflects the population receiving LAIs in clinical practice.",
author = "Taishiro Kishimoto and Masahiro Nitta and Michael Borenstein and Kane, {John M.} and Correll, {Christoph U.}",
year = "2013",
month = "10",
doi = "10.4088/JCP.13r08440",
language = "English",
volume = "74",
pages = "957--965",
journal = "Journal of Clinical Psychiatry",
issn = "0160-6689",
publisher = "Physicians Postgraduate Press Inc.",
number = "10",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Long-acting injectable versus oral antipsychotics in schizophrenia

T2 - A systematic review and meta-analysis of mirror-image studies

AU - Kishimoto, Taishiro

AU - Nitta, Masahiro

AU - Borenstein, Michael

AU - Kane, John M.

AU - Correll, Christoph U.

PY - 2013/10

Y1 - 2013/10

N2 - Objective: Recent, large, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no benefit of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics over oral antipsychotics in preventing relapse in schizophrenia, nor did a recent meta-analysis incorporating these studies. However, RCTs might enroll a disproportionate number of patients with better treatment adherence and lower illness severity. Mirrorimage studies, which compare periods of oral antipsychotic versus LAI treatment in the same patients, might therefore better reflect the real-world impact of LAIs. Data Sources: A systematic literature search without language restriction was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL until May 31, 2012. Search terms included synonyms of (1) antipsychotic(s) AND (2) schizophrenia and related disorders AND (3) depot, (long-acting) injection(s), microsphere, decanoate, palmitate, enanthate. Study Selection: Of 5,483 identified citations, 607 articles were fully inspected, and 582 were ineligible. Finally, 25 mirror-image studies from 28 countries that followed 5,940 patients with schizophrenia for ≥ 12 months (≥ 6 months each on oral antipsychotic and LAI treatment) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Data Extraction: Coprimary outcomes were hospitalization risk and number of hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization days and length of stay. Data Synthesis: LAIs showed strong superiority over oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization (16 studies, N = 4,066; risk ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53; P < .001) and in decreasing the number of hospitalizations (15 studies, 6,342 person-years; rate ratio = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.28-0.51; P < .001). This strong advantage was also observed for secondary outcomes and in multiple clinically relevant subpopulations and treatment groups. Conclusions: Results from mirror-image studies in patients eligible for clinical use of LAIs showed strong superiority of LAIs compared to oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization. The results were in contrast to the recent meta-analysis of RCTs, which showed no superiority of LAIs. Given the possible biases in mirrorimage studies, such as expectation bias, natural illness course, and time effect, a cautious interpretation is required. Nevertheless, the population in mirror-image studies better reflects the population receiving LAIs in clinical practice.

AB - Objective: Recent, large, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showed no benefit of long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics over oral antipsychotics in preventing relapse in schizophrenia, nor did a recent meta-analysis incorporating these studies. However, RCTs might enroll a disproportionate number of patients with better treatment adherence and lower illness severity. Mirrorimage studies, which compare periods of oral antipsychotic versus LAI treatment in the same patients, might therefore better reflect the real-world impact of LAIs. Data Sources: A systematic literature search without language restriction was conducted using MEDLINE/PubMed, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, PsycINFO, and CINAHL until May 31, 2012. Search terms included synonyms of (1) antipsychotic(s) AND (2) schizophrenia and related disorders AND (3) depot, (long-acting) injection(s), microsphere, decanoate, palmitate, enanthate. Study Selection: Of 5,483 identified citations, 607 articles were fully inspected, and 582 were ineligible. Finally, 25 mirror-image studies from 28 countries that followed 5,940 patients with schizophrenia for ≥ 12 months (≥ 6 months each on oral antipsychotic and LAI treatment) met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Data Extraction: Coprimary outcomes were hospitalization risk and number of hospitalizations. Secondary outcomes included hospitalization days and length of stay. Data Synthesis: LAIs showed strong superiority over oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization (16 studies, N = 4,066; risk ratio = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.35-0.53; P < .001) and in decreasing the number of hospitalizations (15 studies, 6,342 person-years; rate ratio = 0.38; 95% CI, 0.28-0.51; P < .001). This strong advantage was also observed for secondary outcomes and in multiple clinically relevant subpopulations and treatment groups. Conclusions: Results from mirror-image studies in patients eligible for clinical use of LAIs showed strong superiority of LAIs compared to oral antipsychotics in preventing hospitalization. The results were in contrast to the recent meta-analysis of RCTs, which showed no superiority of LAIs. Given the possible biases in mirrorimage studies, such as expectation bias, natural illness course, and time effect, a cautious interpretation is required. Nevertheless, the population in mirror-image studies better reflects the population receiving LAIs in clinical practice.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84887080795&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84887080795&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.4088/JCP.13r08440

DO - 10.4088/JCP.13r08440

M3 - Article

C2 - 24229745

AN - SCOPUS:84887080795

VL - 74

SP - 957

EP - 965

JO - Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

JF - Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

SN - 0160-6689

IS - 10

ER -