Article

Number needed to treat and number needed to harm with paliperidone palmitate relative to long-acting haloperidol, bromperidol, and fluphenazine decanoate for treatment of patients with schizophrenia

Johnson & Johnson Pharmaceutical Research & Development, LLC, Raritan, NJ, USA
Neuropsychiatric Disease and Treatment (Impact Factor: 2.15). 03/2011; 7:93-101. DOI: 10.2147/NDT.S17177
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We analyzed data retrieved through a PubMed search of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of first-generation antipsychotic long-acting injectables (haloperidol decanoate, bromperidol decanoate, and fluphenazine decanoate), and a company database of paliperidone palmitate, to compare the benefit-risk ratio in patients with schizophrenia.
From the eight studies that met our selection criteria, two efficacy and six safety parameters were selected for calculation of number needed to treat (NNT), number needed to harm (NNH), and the likelihood of being helped or harmed (LHH) using comparisons of active drug relative to placebo. NNTs for prevention of relapse ranged from 2 to 5 for paliperidone palmitate, haloperidol decanoate, and fluphenazine decanoate, indicating a moderate to large effect size.
Among the selected maintenance studies, NNH varied considerably, but indicated a lower likelihood of encountering extrapyramidal side effects, such as akathisia, tremor, and tardive dyskinesia, with paliperidone palmitate versus placebo than with first-generation antipsychotic depot agents versus placebo. This was further supported by an overall higher NNH for paliperidone palmitate versus placebo with respect to anticholinergic use and Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale positive score. LHH for preventing relapse versus use of anticholinergics was 15 for paliperidone palmitate and 3 for fluphenazine decanoate, favoring paliperidone palmitate.
Overall, paliperidone palmitate had a similar NNT and a more favorable NNH compared with the first-generation long-acting injectables assessed.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: David W Hough, Jun 20, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
151 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVES: This is one of the first cases reported in the literature of paliperidone-palmitate-induced prolonged dyskinesia. METHOD: Case report. RESULTS: We report the case of a 49-year-old woman with paranoid schizophrenia who developed orofacial dyskinesia some 4 months after the commencement of paliperidone long-acting injection. CONCLUSION: This case serves as a clinical reminder that dyskinesia can occur with all antipsychotic medications.
    General hospital psychiatry 06/2012; 35(2). DOI:10.1016/j.genhosppsych.2012.04.009 · 2.90 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: What messages the terms number need to treat (NNT) and number need to harm (NNH) give to the clinician? NNT and NNH terms are epidemiological measures that are commonly used day by day. These terms give their messages to the clinician independent from statistical significance and provide important support when he or she plans patient's treatment protocol. The aim of this review is to give some clues to the clinicians in order to interpret these two terms.
    06/2012; 2(2):91-94. DOI:10.5455/jmood.20120615045043
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Commonly used statistical measures to quantify the likelihood of an adverse drug event (ADE) from clinical trials include risk ratio; odds ratio; and number needed to harm (NNH), the reciprocal of absolute risk. This critical review focused on NNH, specifically on its limitations in controlled trials with psychotropic medication. Data for this evaluation were obtained primarily from articles in MEDLINE from 1988 to 2012. Limitations of NNH were found to include the following: a) arbitrary binary cutoffs for continuous measures, b) limited use of confidence intervals, c) limited adjustments for potential baseline confounders, d) limited adjustments for differences in dose and treatment duration, e) rare consideration of high attrition rates, f) variable use of the term harm, g) oversimplified single harm comparisons, h) frequent biased design and reporting, i) undue emphasis on less severe ADEs, j) application primarily to short-term clinical trials, and k) little or no generalizability in community practice. In sum, the NNH metric supplies very limited information on the risks of psychotropic medication. Postmarketing surveillance of community treatment populations using case-control methodology provides far more useful data on serious ADEs.
    The Journal of nervous and mental disease 08/2013; 201(8):714-8. DOI:10.1097/NMD.0b013e31829c5013 · 1.81 Impact Factor