Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38219278›Full record

SynthesisNeuropsychopharmacology reports2024

Comparison of brexpiprazole, aripiprazole, and placebo for Japanese major depressive disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Taro Kishi, Kenji Sakuma, Takeo Saito, Atsuo Nakagawa, Masaki Kato, Nakao Iwata

Open access · goldAbstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Neuropsychopharmacology reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 21% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Taro KishiDepartment of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9237-2236
Kenji SakumaDepartment of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.
Takeo SaitoDepartment of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.
Atsuo NakagawaDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, School of Medicine, St. Marianna University, Kawasaki, Japan.
Masaki KatoDepartment of Neuropsychiatry, Kansai Medical University, Osaka, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6727-7272
Nakao IwataDepartment of Psychiatry, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Japan.
Fujita Health University · JPKansai Medical University · JPSt. Marianna University School of Medicine · JP

Funding

Japan Society for the Promotion of Science 23K06998
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimThis systematic review and frequentist network meta-analysis used random-effects models is conducted to determine whether there are differences in the efficacy, acceptability, tolerability, and safety profiles of brexpiprazole (BRE) and aripiprazole (ARI) for Japanese with major depressive disorder (MDD) who were inadequately responsive to antidepressants.

methodsOutcome measures were scores on the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (primary), the Clinical Global Impression severity scale, and social functioning scale; the non-response rate; the non-remission rate; all-cause discontinuation; discontinuation due to adverse events (DAE); at least one adverse event (1AE); serious adverse event, akathisia; tremor; weight gain.

resultsA literature search identified three double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials. These comprised one BRE study (with a 1 mg/day [BRE1] and a 2 mg/day [BRE2]) and two ARI studies (with a 3 mg/day arm and a flexible-dose arm[within the dosage range approved in Japan]) (n = 1736). Both BRE and ARI demonstrated better efficacy than the placebo. BRE but not ARI had a higher DAE than the placebo. ARI but not BRE had a higher 1AE than the placebo. BRE and ARI had a higher risk of akathisia and weight gain than the placebo. There were no significant differences between BRE and ARI for any of the outcomes. Although BRE1 had good efficacy, it carried risk of weight gain. Although BRE2 also had efficacy, it carried risks of DAE, akathisia, and weight gain. However, the risk of akathisia in BRE2 was reduced by an initial dose of 0.5 mg/day rather than 1.0 mg/day.

conclusionsOverall BRE showed similar utility to ARI and a good risk-benefit balance.

Indexed as

Major Depressive DisorderQuinolonesThiophenesAripiprazoleHumansJapanPsychomotor AgitationRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicWeight GainAripiprazolebrexpiprazoleQuinolonesThiophenesaripiprazolebrexpiprazoleJapanese major depressive disordernetwork meta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID38219278
PMCPMC10932760
OpenAlexW4390857949

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.