In RISE, TV46000 once monthly (q1m) or once every 2 months (q2m) significantly extended time to impending schizophrenia relapse. The current study (SHINE, NCT03893825) evaluated the long-term safety, tolerability, and effect of TV46000.

Patients completing RISE without relapse (rollover) or newly recruited (de novo) were eligible. The de novo and placebo rollover cohorts were randomized 1:1 to q1m or q2m for ≤56 weeks; the TV46000 rollover cohort continued assigned regimen. Exploratory efficacy endpoints included time to impending relapse and patient centered outcomes (PCOs) including Schizophrenia Quality of Life Scale (SQLS).

334 patients were randomized and received TV46000 q1m (n=172) or q2m (n=162), for 202.3 patient-years [PY] of TV-46000 treatment. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) reported for ≥5% of patients were: overall–injection site pain (event rate/100 PY, n [%]; 23.23, 16 [5%]); de novo (n=109)–injection site pain (56.10, 11 [10%]), injection site nodule (16.03, 6 [6%]), blood creatine phosphokinase increased (16.03, 8 [7%]), urinary tract infection (10.69, 7 [6%]); placebo rollover (n=53)–tremor (18.50, 5 [9%]); TV46000 rollover (n=172)–headache (7.97, n=8 [5%]). Serious AEs reported for ≥2 patients were worsening schizophrenia and hyperglycemia. Kaplan– Meier estimates for remaining relapse-free at week 56 were 0.98 (2% risk; q1m) and 0.88 (12%; q2m). SQLS improved for q1m (least-squares mean change [SE], − 2.16 [0.98]) and q2m (− 0.43 [0.98]); other PCOs (5Level EuroQoL 5Dimensions Questionnaire, Personal and Social Performance Scale, Drug Attitudes Inventory 10-item version) remained stable.

TV-46000 had a favorable long-term benefit–risk profile in patients with schizophrenia.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D Inc.

Study Registration Number: NCT03893825

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) face unique challenges when managing patients with schizophrenia. Educational initiatives targeting common clinical dilemmas encountered by clinicians, including partial or nonadherence, may alleviate knowledge gaps and clarify the role of long-acting injectable antipsychotic agents (LAIs) in treating this population.

4 experts in schizophrenia management used empirical evidence to identify 11 key clinical dilemmas where LAIs may be useful. These experts then developed a heuristic, educational tool (S.C.O.P.E.™: Schizophrenia Clinical Outcome Scenarios and Patient-Provider Engagement) based on empirical evidence and expert opinion for clinicians to use when encountering similar scenarios to optimize schizophrenia care.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is a freely-available resource comprising an interactive digital platform providing educational materials for HCPs involved in continued care for patients with schizophrenia. S.C.O.P.E.™ provides HCPs with considerations in common clinical scenarios met in inpatient and outpatient settings, as well as questions to consider when patients present to the emergency department. The potential usefulness of LAIs is explored in each scenario. Clinical education videos prepare nurse practitioners, social workers, and case managers to address patient concerns and communicate the benefits of LAI treatment. S.C.O.P.E.™ will not replace clinical judgment, guidelines, or continuing medical education, and is not a platform for recording patient-level data, nor intended for payer negotiations or access-related questions by HCPs.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is an educational tool for HCPs to use alongside standard psychiatric evaluations to improve understanding of how to manage common clinical dilemmas when treating patients with schizophrenia and the role of LAIs in schizophrenia management.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) face unique challenges when managing patients with schizophrenia. Educational initiatives targeting common clinical dilemmas encountered by clinicians, such as unfamiliarity with prescribing information for long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs), may assist clinicians when treating patients with schizophrenia.

Four experts in schizophrenia management used empirical evidence to identify 11 key clinical dilemmas where LAIs may be useful. These experts then developed a heuristic, educational tool (S.C.O.P.E.™: Schizophrenia Clinical Outcome Scenarios and Patient-Provider Engagement) based on empirical evidence and expert opinion for clinicians to use when encountering similar scenarios to optimize schizophrenia care. S.C.O.P.E.™ also includes supportive elements such as an LAI selector.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is a freely available resource comprising an interactive digital platform providing educational materials for HCPs involved in continued care for patients with schizophrenia. To acquaint HCPs with characteristics of common LAIs used in schizophrenia treatment, S.C.O.P.E.™ offers a selector that filters LAIs by approved indication(s), initiation regimen, reconstitution, dosing strengths and frequency, injection volumes and routes, and supply and storage information based on approved product labels. The LAI selector does not provide LAI safety and efficacy data, so HCPs should visit individual product websites for this information. Therefore, S.C.O.P.E.™ will not replace clinical judgment, guidelines, or continuing medical education, and is not a platform for recording patient-level data, nor intended for payer negotiations or access-related questions by HCPs.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is an educational tool for HCPs to use alongside standard psychiatric evaluations to improve understanding of how to manage common clinical dilemmas when treating patients with schizophrenia, the role of LAIs in schizophrenia management, and the product characteristics of available LAIs.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.

Male rectal and anal cancer patients demonstrate high rates of sexual dysfunction. This pilot randomized controlled trial tested a psychoeducational intervention designed to improve psychosexual adjustment.

Rectal or anal cancer patients were randomized to a Sexual Health Intervention for Men (intervention) or to a referral and information control (control). The intervention included control activities plus 4 sexual health intervention sessions every 4–6 weeks and 3 brief telephone calls timed between these sessions. Assessments were completed pre-intervention (baseline) and 3 months (follow-up 1) and 8 months (follow-up 2) post-intervention. Differences were assessed with statistical significance and Cohen’s d effect sizes (d = 0.2, small effect; d = 0.5, moderate effect; d = 0.8, large effect).

Ninety subjects enrolled. Forty-three participants completed at least 1 follow-up assessment (intervention, n = 14; control n = 29). At follow-up 1, men in intervention, compared to control, improved on all domains of the International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF) (p < 0.001 to p < 0.05) and demonstrated large effects (d = 0.8 to d = 1.5). Similarly, at follow-up 2, changes in all domains of the IIEF except the orgasm domain were either statistically significant or marginally statistically significant (p = 0.01 to p = 0.08) and demonstrated moderate to large treatment effects for intervention versus control (d = 0.5 to d = 0.8). Men in the intervention, compared to control, demonstrated decreased sexual bother at follow-up 1 (p = 0.009, d = 1.1), while Self-Esteem and Relationship (SEAR) total scores and the SEAR sexual relationship subscale demonstrated moderate increases for intervention versus control (d = 0.4 to d = 0.6).

This study provides initial evidence for combining a psychoeducational intervention with medical interventions to address sexual dysfunction following rectal and anal cancer. Trials register number: NCT00712751 (date of registration: 7/10/2008).

We aim to analyze the efficacy and safety of TMS on cognition in mild cognitive impairment (MCI), Alzheimer’s disease (AD), AD-related dementias, and nondementia conditions with comorbid cognitive impairment.

Systematic review, Meta-Analysis

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane database, APA PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Scopus from January 1, 2000, to February 9, 2023.

RCTs, open-label, and case series studies reporting cognitive outcomes following TMS intervention were included.

Cognitive and safety outcomes were measured. Cochrane Risk of Bias for RCTs and MINORS (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies) criteria were used to evaluate study quality. This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022326423).

The systematic review included 143 studies (n = 5,800 participants) worldwide, encompassing 94 RCTs, 43 open-label prospective, 3 open-label retrospective, and 3 case series. The meta-analysis included 25 RCTs in MCI and AD. Collectively, these studies provide evidence of improved global and specific cognitive measures with TMS across diagnostic groups. Only 2 studies (among 143) reported 4 adverse events of seizures: 3 were deemed TMS unrelated and another resolved with coil repositioning. Meta-analysis showed large effect sizes on global cognition (Mini-Mental State Examination (SMD = 0.80 [0.26, 1.33], p = 0.003), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (SMD = 0.85 [0.26, 1.44], p = 0.005), Alzheimer’s Disease Assessment Scale–Cognitive Subscale (SMD = −0.96 [−1.32, −0.60], p < 0.001)) in MCI and AD, although with significant heterogeneity.

The reviewed studies provide favorable evidence of improved cognition with TMS across all groups with cognitive impairment. TMS was safe and well tolerated with infrequent serious adverse events.

Class III obesity is associated with increased risk for cognitive impairment. Though hypothesized to be partially attributable to sedentary time (ST), past research examining the association between ST and cognitive function has produced mixed findings. One possible explanation is that studies do not typically account for the highly correlated and almost inverse relationship between ST and light intensity physical activity (LPA), such that ST displaces time engaging in LPA. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate whether: (1) higher ST-to-LPA time ratio associates with poorer performance across multiple cognitive domains in patients with Class III obesity seeking bariatric surgery; and (2) the associations differ by sex.

Participants (N = 121, 21-65 years of age, BMI > 40 kg/m2) scheduled for either Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) or Sleeve Gastrectomy (SG) completed the NIH Toolbox, a computerized neuropsychological assessment battery and wore a waist-mounted ActiGraph monitor during waking hours for 7 days to measure minutes/day spent in ST, LPA, and moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA). A ratio of time spent in ST-to-LPA was calculated by dividing the percentage of daily wear time spent in sedentary behavior (SB) by the percentage of daily wear time spent in LPA.

On average, participants (mean age = 43.22 years old and BMI = 45.83 kg/m2) wore the accelerometer for 909±176 minutes/day and spent 642±174 minutes/day in ST, 254±79 minutes/day in LPA, and 14±13 minutes/day in MVPA. Mean daily ST-to-LPA time ratio was 2.81 ± 1.3 (0.73-7.11). Overall, bivariate Pearson correlations found no significant relationships between LPA and cognitive performance on any of the NIH Toolbox subtests (r values = -.002 to -.158, all p values >.05). Additionally, bivariate Pearson correlations also found no significant relationships between daily ST-to-LPA time ratio and cognitive performance on any of the subtests (r values = .003 to .108, all p values >.05). However, higher ST-to-LPA was associated with lower scores on the Dimensional Change Card Sort Test in women (r = -.26, p = .01).

Results showed that participants’ mean daily time spent in ST was 2.5 times higher than that spent in LPA and a higher ratio of ST-to-LPA was associated with poorer set-shifting in women with Class III obesity. Future studies should look to clarify underlying mechanisms, particularly studies examining possible sex differences in the cognitive benefits of PA. Similarly, intervention studies are also needed to determine if increasing LPA levels for individuals with Class III obesity would lead to improved cognitive performance by means of reducing ST.

Lumateperone is an FDA-approved antipsychotic to treat schizophrenia and depressive episodes associated with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder as monotherapy and as adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate. This post hoc analysis investigated the efficacy and tolerability of lumateperone in patients with schizophrenia via number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and likelihood to be helped or harmed (LHH).

Data were pooled from three late-phase 4–6 week placebo-controlled studies of lumateperone 42 mg/day in adults with schizophrenia and an acute exacerbation of psychosis (Study 005 [NCT01499563], Study 301 [NCT02282761], Study 302 [NCT02469155]). NNT and NNH were calculated vs placebo for several different Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] Total score response cutoffs (percent reduction from baseline) and for adverse events (AEs), respectively.

In the two informative studies (placebo, n=221; lumateperone, n=224), the NNT vs placebo for lumateperone was statistically significant for PANSS Total score reductions from baseline to 4 weeks/endpoint of ≥20% (NNT=9, 95% confidence interval [CI] 5–36) and ≥30% (NNT=8; 95%CI 5–21). In all studies pooled (placebo, n=412; lumateperone, n=406), study discontinuations due to AEs were uncommon and the NNH (389) was not statistically significant from placebo. The only AE with NNH vs placebo <10 was somnolence/sedation (NNH=8; 95%CI 6–12). With lumateperone treatment, weight gain ≥7% from baseline was similar to placebo (NNH=112) and fewer patients experienced akathisia than placebo. Lumateperone LHH ratios were >>1 for all AEs (range 13.6–48.6) except somnolence/sedation (LHH~1).

Lumateperone’s benefit-risk profile was favorable in late-phase schizophrenia trials.

Intra-Cellular Therapies, Inc.