Safety and Efficacy of Aripiprazole 2-Month Ready-to-Use 960 mg in Adult Patients With Bipolar I Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Aripiprazole 2-month ready-to-use 960 mg (Ari 2MRTU 960) is a new long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotic formulation for gluteal administration every 2 months. This 32-week trial evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of multiple-dose administration of Ari 2MRTU 960 in clinically stable adults with schizophrenia or BP-I, versus that of aripiprazole once-monthly 400 mg (AOM 400; an LAI indicated for the maintenance treatment of schizophrenia in adult patients stabilized with oral aripiprazole and maintenance monotherapy treatment of BP-I [indication varies by country]). Safety and efficacy outcomes in the subpopulation of patients with BP-I are reported here. Methods Patients with BP-I were randomized to receive Ari 2MRTU 960 every 56±2 days or AOM 400 every 28±2 days. Safety and tolerability assessments included adverse event (AE) reporting, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores (scale range: 0–100) for patient-reported injection site pain, and extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) monitoring. Efficacy was assessed at Week 32 by Clinical Global Impression – Improvement (CGI-I), Clinical Global Impression – Bipolar Version (CGI-BP), Subjective Well-being under Neuroleptic Treatment – Short Form (SWN-S), Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Results Study completion rate was 72.5% (29/40 patients) in the Ari 2MRTU 960 group and 70.7% (29/41 patients) in the AOM 400 group. Demographics and baseline disease characteristics were generally well balanced between treatment groups. Treatment-emergent AE (TEAE) incidence was 82.5% with Ari 2MRTU 960 and 87.8% with AOM 400. The most frequent TEAEs were increased weight (Ari 2MRTU 960, 25.0%; AOM 400, 26.8%) and injection site pain (Ari 2MRTU 960, 25.0%; AOM 400, 7.3%). Mean (standard deviation [SD]) VAS score for pain after last injection was 1.2 (2.07) with Ari 2MRTU 960 and 1.3 (2.19) with AOM 400. Minimal change was seen in EPS in either group. At Week 32, mean (SD) CGI-I score was 3.1 [1.2] with Ari 2MRTU 960 and 3.2 [1.5] with AOM 400, and there was minimal mean (SD) change from baseline in CGI-BP score (Ari 2MRTU 960, -0.2 [1.0]; AOM 400, -0.6 [1.2]). Mean (SD) change from baseline in SWN-S Total score was 10.3 (16.1) with Ari 2MRTU 960 and 3.4 (21.4) with AOM 400. There was no clinically meaningful difference between the groups in MADRS Total score or YMRS Total score (difference of least squares mean change from baseline [95% confidence interval]: MADRS Total score -2.1 [-6.3, 2.1], p=0.3185; YMRS Total score 0.1 [-1.8, 2.1], p=0.8995). Conclusions In patients with BP-I, Ari 2MRTU 960 was generally well tolerated, and clinical stability was maintained during the study. Funding Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc. (Princeton, NJ, USA) and H. Lundbeck A/S (Valby, Denmark).
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".