Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT01451164

A Dose-finding Trial of OPC-34712 in Patients With Schizophrenia

To investigate the efficacy and safety of OPC-34712 in comparison with placebo in patients with schizophrenia.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Schizophrenia Mental Disorders Schizophrenia Spectrum and Other Psychotic Disorders

Age range

18 year–65 year

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Phase 2 / Phase 3

Primary location

Kanto Region, Japan

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients age 18 years or older to less than 65 years (at time of informed consent) diagnosed with schizophrenia based on DSM-IV-TR diagnostic criteria
  • Patients who are hospitalized, or judged to required hospitalization, for acute relapse of schizophrenia at time of informed consent
  • Patients who are experiencing acute exacerbation of psychotic symptoms

Exclusion criteria

  • Female patients who are breastfeeding or who have a positive pregnancy test (urine) result prior to receiving investigational medicinal product
  • Patients presenting a first episode of schizophrenia based on the clinical judgment of the investigator
  • Patients who are diagnosed with a disease other than schizophrenia (schizoaffective disorder, major depressive disorder, bipolar disorder, posttraumatic stress disorder, anxiety disorder, delirium, dementia, amnesia, or other cognitive disorder) based on current DSM-IV-TR Axis Ι criteria, or who are diagnosed with a personality disorder (borderline, paranoid, histrionic, schizotypal, schizoid, or antisocial)

Treatment and study plan

OPC-34712

Drug

orally administered once daily

Placebo

Drug

orally administered once daily

Primary outcomes

  1. Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Total Score

    Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

    The PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS total score was the sum of the rating scores for 7 positive scale items, 7 negative scale items, and 16 general psychopathology scale items from the PANSS panel. The PANSS total score ranged from 30 (best possible outcome) to 210 (worst possible outcome).

Secondary outcomes

  1. Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in PANSS Positive Subscale Score.

    Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

    PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS positive subscale score was the sum of the rating scores for the 7 positive scale items from the PANSS panel. The 7 positive symptom constructs are delusions, conceptual disorganization, hallucinatory behavior, excitement, grandiosity, suspiciousness, and hostility. The PANSS positive subscale score ranged from 7 (best possible outcome) to 49 (worst possible outcome).

  2. Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in PANSS Negative Subscale Score.

    Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

    The PANSS consisted of three subscales: a total of 30 symptom constructs. For each symptom construct, severity was rated on a 7-point scale, with a score of 1 (absence of symptoms) and a score of 7 (extremely severe symptoms). The PANSS negative subscale score was the sum of the rating scores for the 7 negative scale items from the PANSS panel. The 7 negative symptom constructs: blunted affect, emotional withdrawal, poor rapport, passive/apathetic social withdrawal, difficulty in abstract thinking, lack of spontaneity and flow of conversation, stereotyped thinking. The PANSS negative subscale score ranged from 7 (best possible outcome) to 49 (worst possible outcome).

  3. Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S)

    Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

    Severity of illness for each participant was rated using the CGI-S, which was the secondary efficacy endpoint. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: "Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the participant at this time?" Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = normal, not at all ill; 2 = borderline mentally ill; 3 = mildly ill; 4 = moderately ill; 5 = markedly ill; 6 = severely ill; and 7 = among the most extremely ill participants.

  4. Mean Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Scale Score at Week 6.

    Time frame: Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6

    The efficacy of trial medication was rated for each participant using the CGI-I. The study physician would rate the participant's total improvement whether or not it is due entirely to drug treatment. All responses were compared to the participant's condition at Baseline prior to the first dose of double-blind study medication. Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

Industry

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2011
Primary completion
2015
First posted
Oct 13, 2011
Registry last updated
Oct 3, 2019

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Related clinical trials

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.