Back to Journals » Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment » Volume 15

Efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 3-month versus 1-month formulation in patients with schizophrenia: comparison between European and non-European population

Authors Savitz AJ, Xu H, Gopal S, Nuamah I, Ravenstijn P, Hough D, Hargarter L

Received 3 October 2018

Accepted for publication 10 January 2019

Published 21 February 2019 Volume 2019:15 Pages 587—602


Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single anonymous peer review

Peer reviewer comments 2

Editor who approved publication: Dr Roger Pinder

Adam J Savitz,1 Haiyan Xu,1 Srihari Gopal,1 Isaac Nuamah,1 Paulien Ravenstijn,2 David Hough,1 Ludger Hargarter3

1Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA; 2Janssen Research & Development, a Division of Janssen Pharmaceutica NV, Beerse, Belgium; 3Medical & Scientific Affairs, Janssen Cilag EMEA, Neuss, Germany

Purpose: This randomized, double-blind (DB), non-inferiority phase 3 study was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of paliperidone palmitate 3-month (PP3M) vs 1-month formulation (PP1M) in European and non-European patients with schizophrenia.
Patients and methods: In this randomized, DB, parallel-group study, adult patients (18–70 years) with schizophrenia (per DSM-IV-TR) having Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score between 70 and 120; previously stabilized on PP1M were enrolled. The study had 4 phases: screening (3 weeks), open-label (OL) stabilization (17 weeks), DB (48 weeks) and follow-up (4–12 weeks) phase. Patients were treated with fixed-dose PP3M (175–525 mg eq deltoid/gluteal) or PP1M (50–150 mg eq deltoid/gluteal) for 48 weeks in DB phase.
Results: In total, 487 European (PP3M, n=242; PP1M, n=245) and 508 non-European patients (PP3M, n=241; PP1M, n=267) entered DB phase (modified intent-to-treat (mITT) [DB] analysis set). Among the 508 non-European patients in mITT set, 67.7% were from Asia (n=344) and 32.3% were from rest of world (ROW, n=164). During the DB phase, similar percentage of Europeans (PP3M: 7%; PP1M: 8%) and non-Europeans (PP3M: 9%; PP1M: 10%) experienced relapse (Kaplan–Meier estimate PP3M–PP1M [95% CI] of percentage of relapse-free patients at the end of DB phase [primary endpoint]: European: 1.0% [-4.3%; 6.2%]; non-European: 1.4% [-4.4%; 7.1%]; Asian: 1.6% [-5.7%; 9.0%]; and ROW: 1.4% [-7.0%, 9.8%], per-protocol analysis set). Incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was lower in Europeans (PP3M: 56%, PP1M: 59%) than non-Europeans (PP3M: 80%, PP1M: 73%). The most commonly reported TEAE was weight gain.
Conclusion: PP3M showed similar efficacy to PP1M in Europeans and non-Europeans, consistent with non-inferiority of PP3M to PP1M observed in overall population. Rates of AEs were higher in non-Europeans. However, weight gain was greater in non-Europeans, especially the Asian population.

Keywords: long-acting injectable, non-inferiority, randomized, relapse, tolerability

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]  View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]