岸 太郎

The United States Food and Drug Administration approved the xanomeline-trospium combination in September 2024 for treating schizophrenia, based in part on three double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials in adults with schizophrenia experiencing acute psychosis. This random-effects model pairwise meta-analysis of those three trials found that xanomeline-trospium was comparable to placebo in terms of all-cause discontinuation, discontinuation rate due to adverse events, Simpson-Angus Scale score change, Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale score change, body weight change, body mass index change, blood pressure change, serum total cholesterol change, blood glucose change, QTc interval changes, and the incidence of headache, somnolence, insomnia, dizziness, akathisia, agitation, tachycardia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, diarrhea, increased weight, and decreased appetite. However, xanomeline-trospium was associated with a higher incidence of at least one adverse event, dry mouth, hypertension, nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, and constipation, and increased serum triglyceride compared with placebo. Notably, xanomeline-trospium demonstrated superior efficacy than placebo in improving the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score, PANSS positive subscale score, and PANSS negative subscale score.

Dummy.

IMPORTANCE: To date, several theta burst stimulation (TBS) protocols, such as intermittent TBS (iTBS), have been proposed; however, previous systematic reviews have revealed inconsistent efficacy findings in individual TBS studies for schizophrenia. OBJECTIVE: To examine which TBS protocols are associated with the most favorable and acceptable outcomes in adults with schizophrenia. DATA SOURCES: The Cochrane Library, PubMed, and Embase databases were searched for studies published before May 22, 2024. STUDY SELECTION: The inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) published and unpublished randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of any TBS treatment and (2) RCTs including individuals with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, other psychotic disorders, or both. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: This study followed the Cochrane standards for data extraction and data quality assessment and used the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guideline for reporting. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed using the second version of the Cochrane risk of bias tool, and the Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis application was used to rate the certainty of evidence for meta-analysis results. At least 2 authors double-checked the literature search, data transfer accuracy, and calculations. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome of this study was improvement in scores related to negative symptoms. Our frequentist network meta-analysis used a random-effects model. The standardized mean difference (SMD) or odds ratio for continuous or dichotomous variables, respectively, was calculated with 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 30 RCTs of 9 TBS protocols, with 1424 participants, were included. Only iTBS over the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (L-DLPFC) was associated with reduced negative symptom scores (SMD, -0.89; 95% CI, -1.24 to -0.55), overall symptom scores (SMD, -0.81; 95% CI, -1.15 to -0.48), Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale general subscale scores (SMD, -0.57; 95% CI, -0.89 to -0.25), depressive symptom scores (SMD, -0.70; 95% CI, -1.04 to -0.37), and anxiety symptom scores (SMD, -0.58; 95% CI, -0.92 to -0.24) and improved overall cognitive impairment scores (SMD, -0.52; 95% CI, -0.89 to -0.15) compared with a sham. However, positive symptom score changes, all-cause discontinuation rate, discontinuation rate due to adverse events, headache incidence, and dizziness incidence did not significantly differ between any TBS protocols and sham. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this network meta-analysis, iTBS over the L-DLPFC was associated with improved scores for negative, depressive, anxiety, and cognitive symptoms in individuals with schizophrenia and was well tolerated by the participants. Other forms of TBS were not associated with benefit. Further research is needed to assess the potential role of TBS in the treatment of schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: We report the final results of treatment with aripiprazole, blonanserin, and paliperidone from the Japan Useful Medication Program for Schizophrenia (JUMPs), a 104-week naturalistic study. METHODS: JUMPs was an open-label, three-arm, randomized, parallel-group, 104-week study. Patients aged ≥ 20 years with schizophrenia requiring antipsychotic treatment or a switch from previous therapy were enrolled. The primary endpoint was treatment discontinuation rate over 104 weeks. Secondary endpoints included remission rate, Personal and Social Performance (PSP), safety, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), and quality of life (QOL; EuroQol-5 dimension). RESULTS: In total, 251 patients received aripiprazole (n = 82), blonanserin (n = 85), or paliperidone (n = 84). Treatment discontinuation rates (aripiprazole, 80.5%; blonanserin, 81.2%; paliperidone, 71.4%) were not significantly different (p = 0.2385) among the treatment groups at 104 weeks; comparable outcomes were observed for endpoints, including remission (42.9%, 46.7%, and 45.8%), PANSS, and safety. In the overall cohort, while the improvement in the PSP total score at Week 104 was not significantly different from baseline, a significant improvement (p < 0.05) in QOL and total PANSS scores (including all subscales) was observed at Week 104 compared with baseline. Multivariable analysis identified a shorter disease duration and a higher chlorpromazine-equivalent antipsychotic dosage level (≥ 1000 mg) before switching to monotherapy as predictors of treatment discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: The 104-week treatment outcomes were comparable between groups; the overall trend of improvement in remission rate, safety, and QOL suggests the importance of continued treatment. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-Clinical Trials Registry UMIN000007942 (public release date: 14/05/2012).

In clinical practice, theta burst stimulation (TBS) presents as a more efficient and potentially more effective therapeutic modality than conventional repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), as it allows for the delivery of more stimuli in less time and at similar intensities. To date, accelerated treatment plans according to various continuous (cTBS) and intermittent TBS (iTBS) protocols for depression have been proposed. To investigate which of the TBS protocols provided a favorable risk-benefit balance for individuals with depression, this systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis was conducted. The study outcomes included response rate (primary), depression symptom improvement, remission rate, all-cause discontinuation rate, incidence of switch to mania, and incidence of headache/discomfort at treatment site. In this meta-analysis, a total of 23 randomized controlled trials (n = 960, mean age = 41.88 years, with 60.78% females) were included. Approximately 69.57% of the trials included individuals with an exclusive diagnosis of major depressive disorder. The following six TBS protocols (target) were evaluated: cTBS (right-dorsolateral prefrontal cortex [R-DLPFC]), cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (left-DLPFC [L-DLPFC]), iTBS (L-DLPFC), iTBS (L-DLPFC) + iTBS (R-DLPFC), iTBS (left-dorsomedial prefrontal cortex) + iTBS (right-dorsomedial prefrontal cortex), and iTBS (occipital lobe). Compared to sham, cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC), iTBS (L-DLPFC), and iTBS (occipital lobe) had a higher response rate (k = 23); cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC) and iTBS (L-DLPFC) dominated in the depression symptom improvement (k = 23); and iTBS (L-DLPFC) had a higher remission rate (k = 15). No significant differences were found for all-cause discontinuation rate (k = 17), incidence of switch to mania (k = 7), and incidence of headache/discomfort at treatment site (k = 10) between any TBS protocols and sham. Thus, cTBS (R-DLPFC) + iTBS (L-DLPFC) and iTBS (L-DLPFC) demonstrate favorable risk-benefit balance for the treatment of depression.

Background and Objective: Excellent generalizability is the precondition for the widespread practical implementation of machine learning models. In our previous study, we developed the schizophrenia classification model (SZ classifier) to identify potential schizophrenia patients in the Japanese population. The SZ classifier has exhibited impressive performance during internal validation. However, ensuring the robustness and generalizability of the SZ classifier requires external validation across independent sample sets. In this study, we aimed to present an external validation of the SZ classifier using outpatient data. Methods: The SZ classifier was trained by using online survey data, which incorporate demographic, health-related, and social comorbidity features. External validation was conducted using an outpatient sample set which is independent from the sample set during the model development phase. The model performance was assessed based on the sensitivity and misclassification rates for schizophrenia, bipolar disorder, and major depression patients. Results: The SZ classifier demonstrated a sensitivity of 0.75 when applied to schizophrenia patients. The misclassification rates were 59% and 55% for bipolar disorder and major depression patients, respectively. Conclusions: The SZ classifier currently encounters challenges in accurately determining the presence or absence of schizophrenia at the individual level. Prior to widespread practical implementation, enhancements are necessary to bolster the accuracy and diminish the misclassification rates. Despite the current limitations of the model, such as poor specificity for certain psychiatric disorders, there is potential for improvement if including multiple types of psychiatric disorders during model development.

AIM: To update the major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment guidelines of the Japanese Society of Mood Disorders, we conducted a systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials of available antidepressants in Japan for older adults with MDD. METHODS: Outcome measures included response rate (primary), improvement in depressive symptom scale score, remission rate, all-cause discontinuation, discontinuation due to adverse events, and at least one adverse event. A random-effects model was used to calculate the risk ratio (RR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: Nine double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (n = 2145) were identified. No study has been conducted in Japan. Our meta-analysis included the following antidepressants: duloxetine, escitalopram, imipramine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine. Antidepressants have significantly higher response rates than placebo (RR [95% CI] = 1.38 [1.04, 1.83], p = 0.02). Antidepressants outperformed placebo in terms of improving depressive symptom scale score (SMD [95% CI] = -0.62 [-0.92, -0.33], p < 0.0001). However, antidepressants were associated with a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events (RR [95% CI] = 1.94 [1.30, 2.88], p = 0.001) and a higher incidence of at least one adverse event (RR [95% CI] = 1.11 [1.02, 1.21], p = 0.02) compared to placebo. The groups did not differ significantly in terms of remission rate or all-cause discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Our meta-analysis concluded that treatment with antidepressants available in Japan is only weakly recommended for moderate to severe MDD in older adults.

Background In Japan, challenges were reported in accurately estimating the prevalence of schizophrenia among the general population. Retrieving previous studies, we investigated that patients with schizophrenia were more likely to experience poor subjective well-being and various physical, psychiatric, and social comorbidities. These factors might have great potential for precisely classifying schizophrenia cases in order to estimate the prevalence. Machine learning has shown a positive impact on many fields, including epidemiology, due to its high-precision modeling capability. It has been applied in research on mental disorders. However, few studies have applied machine learning technology to the precise classification of schizophrenia cases by variables of demographic and health-related backgrounds, especially using large-scale web-based surveys. Objective The aim of the study is to construct an artificial neural network (ANN) model that can accurately classify schizophrenia cases from large-scale Japanese web-based survey data and to verify the generalizability of the model. Methods Data were obtained from a large Japanese internet research pooled panel (Rakuten Insight, Inc) in 2021. A total of 223 individuals, aged 20-75 years, having schizophrenia, and 1776 healthy controls were included. Answers to the questions in a web-based survey were formatted as 1 response variable (self-report diagnosed with schizophrenia) and multiple feature variables (demographic, health-related backgrounds, physical comorbidities, psychiatric comorbidities, and social comorbidities). An ANN was applied to construct a model for classifying schizophrenia cases. Logistic regression (LR) was used as a reference. The performances of the models and algorithms were then compared. Results The model trained by the ANN performed better than LR in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.86 vs 0.78), accuracy (0.93 vs 0.91), and specificity (0.96 vs 0.94), while the model trained by LR showed better sensitivity (0.63 vs 0.56). Comparing the performances of the ANN and LR, the ANN was better in terms of area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (bootstrapping: 0.847 vs 0.773 and cross-validation: 0.81 vs 0.72), while LR performed better in terms of accuracy (0.894 vs 0.856). Sleep medication use, age, household income, and employment type were the top 4 variables in terms of importance. Conclusions This study constructed an ANN model to classify schizophrenia cases using web-based survey data. Our model showed a high internal validity. The findings are expected to provide evidence for estimating the prevalence of schizophrenia in the Japanese population and informing future epidemiological studies.

The benefits of serotonin 3 receptor antagonists (5-HT3R-As) in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) treatment remain unclear. Thus, this study aimed to perform a systematic review and a random-effects meta-analysis, including double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials (DBRPCTs). The outcomes include the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (Y-BOCS) total score (primary), Y-BOCS obsession subscale score, Y-BOCS compulsive subscale score, treatment response, remission rate, all-cause discontinuation, and incidence of individual adverse events (nervousness/restlessness/anxiety, insomnia, headache, dizziness/lightheadedness, decreased appetite, constipation, nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, dry mouth, sweating/increased perspiration, itching/pruritus, tremor, and sexual dysfunction/decreased libido). The mean differences (MD) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios for dichotomous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated. Our study included 10 DBRPCTs (n = 628). Pooled 5-HT3R-As outperformed placebo regarding Y-BOCS total score (MD = -5.08, 95% CI = -7.04, -3.12, N = 9, n = 560), Y-BOCS obsession subscale score, Y-BOCS compulsive subscale score, treatment response, and remission rate. Individually, all 5-HT3R-As outperformed placebo regarding Y-BOCS total score (granisetron: MD = -5.59, 95% CI = -8.79, -2.39, N = 3, n = 178, ondansetron: MD = -5.72, 95% CI = -8.06, -3.37, N = 6, n = 331, tropisetron: MD = -2.87, 95% CI = -5.19, -0.550, N = 1, n = 96). However, all-cause discontinuation and incidence of individual adverse events between pooled 5-HT3R-As and placebo were not significantly different. In conclusion, our meta-analysis suggested 5-HT3R-As as efficacious for symptom improvement in individuals with OCD. However, the number of individuals included in each study was small; thus, a replication randomized trial of 5-HT3R-As should be conducted using a larger sample size.

INTRODUCTION: The question remains to be elucidated: "Is treatment with antidepressants at doses approved in Japan effective for Japanese patients with MDD?" It is crucial to confirm this in order to provide appropriate treatments for Japanese patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and random-effects pairwise meta-analysis including these nine double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. METHODS: We calculated the standardized mean difference (SMD) and risk ratio (RR) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). RESULTS: Pooled newer antidepressants outperformed placebo regarding improvement of depressive symptom scale scores [SMD (95% CI) = -0.20 (-0.27, -0.12), p < 0.00001], response to treatment [RR (95% CI) = 1.23 (1.13, 1.32), p < 0.00001], and remission rate [RR (95% CI) = 1.30 (1.16, 1.45), p < 0.00001]. Although all-cause discontinuation was not significantly different between the treatment groups, the pooled antidepressant group showed a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse event [RR (95% CI) = 1.60 (1.13, 2.26), p = 0.007] and a higher incidence of at least one adverse event than the placebo group [RR (95% CI) = 1.13 (1.08, 1.18), p < 0.00001]. DISCUSSION: We concluded that newer antidepressants are effective for Japanese adults with MDD although the clinicians must monitor the health conditions of these individuals.

Our meta-analysis demonstrated that intermittent theta burst stimulation (iTBS)/bilateral-TBS (Bi-TBS) and high-frequency repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (HF-rTMS)/bilateral-rTMS (Bi-rTMS) had similar efficacy, acceptability, and safety profiles for antidepressant treatment-resistant major depressive disorder (AD-TRD). In our sensitivity analysis that excluded a study that compared Bi-TBS with Bi-rTMS for older adults, all efficacy outcomes were also comparable between iTBS and HF-rTMS. Because iTBS does not require higher stimulation intensity and a longer stimulus time than conventional HF-rTMS protocols, we speculated that for those with AD-TRD, iTBS/Bi-TBS is a more helpful therapeutic modality in clinical practice than HF-rTMS/Bi-rTMS.

The physical, psychiatric, and social comorbidities interfere with the everyday activities of community-dwelling individuals with schizophrenia and increase the risk of their readmission. However, these comorbidities have not been investigated comprehensively in Japan. We conducted a self-reported internet survey in February 2022 to identify individuals aged 20–75 years with and without schizophrenia using a prevalence case-control study. The survey compared physical comorbidities such as being overweight, hypertension, and diabetes; psychiatric comorbidities such as depressive symptoms and sleep disturbances; social comorbidities such as employment status, household income, and social support between participants with and without schizophrenia. A total of 223 participants with schizophrenia and 1776 participants without schizophrenia were identified. Participants with schizophrenia were more likely to be overweight and had a higher prevalence of hypertension, diabetes, and dyslipidemia than participants without schizophrenia. Additionally, depressive symptoms, unemployment, and non-regular employment were more prevalent in participants with schizophrenia than those without schizophrenia. These results highlight the necessity of comprehensive support and interventions addressing physical, psychiatric, and social comorbidities in individuals with schizophrenia in the community. In conclusion, effective interventions for managing comorbidities in individuals with schizophrenia are necessary to enable them to continue to live in the community.

A systematic review and random-effects model network meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety of antidepressants to treat adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) in the maintenance phase. This study searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases and included only double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with an enrichment design: patients were stabilized on the antidepressant of interest during the open-label study and then randomized to receive the same antidepressant or placebo. The outcomes were the 6-month relapse rate (primary outcome, efficacy), all-cause discontinuation (acceptability), discontinuation due to adverse events (tolerability), and the incidence of individual adverse events. The risk ratio with a 95% credible interval was calculated. The meta-analysis comprised 34 studies (n = 9384, mean age = 43.80 years, and %females = 68.10%) on 20 antidepressants (agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, vilazodone, and vortioxetine) and a placebo. In terms of the 6-month relapse rate, amitriptyline, citalopram, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, tianeptine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine outperformed placebo. Compared to placebo, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, sertraline, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had lower all-cause discontinuation; however, sertraline had a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events. Compared to placebo, venlafaxine was associated with a lower incidence of dizziness, while desvenlafaxine, sertraline, and vortioxetine were associated with a higher incidence of nausea/vomiting. In conclusion, desvenlafaxine, paroxetine, venlafaxine, and vortioxetine had reasonable efficacy, acceptability, and tolerability in the treatment of adults with stable MDD.