RESULTS suggest that asenapine is a cost-effective alternative to olanzapine in mixed episode BD-I patients, and may have specific advantages in this population, potentially leading to healthcare sector savings and improved outcomes. Limitations of the analysis stem from gaps in clinical and economic evidence for these patients and should be addressed by future clinical trials.

Among adult and pediatric patients in the UK, CLB is more often prescribed for epilepsy than CZP. The median CLB dosage used by both adults and children remained stable over the 16-year study period, while the median CZP dosage increased in both adults and children.

PurposeAtypical antipsychotics (AAs), an effective treatment for schizophrenia, have a range of pharmacologic properties leading to differences in tolerability as well as heterogeneity in treatment response. Individual patient characteristics must be considered when making treatment choices, especially from an adverse event (AE) or tolerability perspective. Despite the availability of numerous AAs, after appraising patient characteristics at the time of treatment selection, physicians may quickly run out of tolerable treatment options.Patients and methodsAE risk factors, defined as having either a prior history of an AE or a risk factor for that AE, were determined for Medicaid-insured and Commercially insured patients using database analysis. Patients receiving AA treatment between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2012 defined the index date of first observed AA prescription during this period. Nine AAs were evaluated for association with AE risk factors as informed by drug prescribing information from the different manufacturers and published meta-analyses. The proportion of patients with pre-index AE risk factors prescribed an AA associated with that risk factor was then determined.ResultsA high proportion of patients (>80%) were prescribed an AA associated with extrapyramidal symptoms or akathisia despite experiencing extrapyramidal symptoms or akathisia prior to AA treatment initiation. Similar trends were observed among patients with diabetes (>60%) and obesity (>40%). From the nine treatment options available, the number of optimal choices for individual patient segments were limited based on their prior history, including those with cardiometabolic and cardiovascular comorbidities (four); experiencing prolactin elevation-related problems (seven); needing to avoid excessive sedation (four); or at risk of extrapyramidal symptoms or akathisia (two). Options were then further restricted among patients in more than one segment when multiple pre-index AE risk factors were combined.ConclusionWhen combining patient risk profile with antipsychotic AE profile, physicians may quickly run out of tolerable treatment options for individual patients, despite the availability of many AAs, suggesting a need for additional treatment options with better tolerability and without compromising efficacy.

NCT00159744, NCT00159796.

Antipsychotics were rarely used to treat depression between 2005-2013 in UK primary care. The choice of adjunctive antipsychotic therapy changed over this time, with atypical antipsychotics now representing the preferred treatment choice. However, information on patients strictly cared for in other settings, such as by psychiatrists or in hospitals, potentially more severe patients, was unavailable and may differ. Nonetheless, the high off-label use in primary care, even after the authorization of quetiapine, suggests that there is a need for more licensed treatment options for adjunctive antipsychotic therapy in major depressive disorder.