Cited by 126Schizophrenia research and treatmentBipolar Disorder and TreatmentTreatment of Major Depression

Efficacy and safety of asenapine in a placebo- and haloperidol-controlled trial in patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia

Kane, John M., Cohen, Michael, Zhao, Jun, Alphs, Larry, Panagides, John·2010·Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology

Abstract

Asenapine is approved by the Food and Drugs Administration in adults for acute treatment of schizophrenia or of manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder with or without psychotic features. In a double-blind 6-week trial, 458 patients with acute schizophrenia were randomly assigned to fixed-dose treatment with asenapine at 5 mg twice daily (BID), asenapine at 10 mg BID, placebo, or haloperidol at 4 mg BID (to verify assay sensitivity). With last observations carried forward (LOCF), mean Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score reductions from baseline to endpoint were significantly greater with asenapine at 5 mg BID (-16.2) and haloperidol (-15.4) than placebo (-10.7; both P < 0.05); using mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), changes at day 42 were significantly greater with asenapine at 5 and 10 mg BID (-21.3 and -19.4, respectively) and haloperidol (-20.0) than placebo (-14.6; all P < 0.05). On the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale positive subscale, all treatments were superior to placebo with LOCF and MMRM; asenapine at 5 mg BID was superior to placebo on the negative subscale with MMRM and on the general psychopathology subscale with LOCF and MMRM. Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 44% and 52%, 57%, and 41% of the asenapine at 5 and 10 mg BID, haloperidol, and placebo groups, respectively. Extrapyramidal symptoms reported as AEs occurred in 15% and 18%, 34%, and 10% of the asenapine at 5 and 10 mg BID, haloperidol, and placebo groups, respectively. Across all groups, no more than 5% of patients had clinically significant weight change. Post hoc analyses indicated that efficacy was similar with asenapine and haloperidol; greater contrasts were seen in AEs, especially extrapyramidal symptoms.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/jcp.0b013e3181d35d6b

Cites

47 of 47 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Kane, J. M., Cohen, M., Zhao, J., Alphs, L., & Panagides, J.
Affiliations
  • Zucker Hillside Hospital (US)
  • Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ, USA (United States) (US)
  • Pfizer (United States) (US)
Corresponding author
Kane, John M.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology
Published
2010-04
Volume
30
Issue
2
Pages
106-115
ISSN
0271-0749 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2050370233
Cited by
126
References
46
Citations by year
2025: 2 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 13
FWCI
12.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
asenapine, haloperidol, acute schizophrenia, antipsychotic efficacy, extrapyramidal symptoms, treatment-related adverse events, dose comparison, weight change
MeSH terms
Acute Disease, Adult, Dibenzocycloheptenes, Double-Blind Method, Female, Haloperidol, Heterocyclic Compounds, 4 or More Rings, Humans, Male, Schizophrenia, Treatment Outcome, Akathisia, Drug-Induced, Parkinsonian Disorders

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review