Trial reportCNS drugs2017
Efficacy and Tolerability of Asenapine Compared with Olanzapine in Borderline Personality Disorder: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial.
Trial report in CNS drugs, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments in borderline personality disorder: A systematic review and network meta-analysis.Molecular psychiatry · 2026Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2022Pooled it
- Pharmacological Treatments for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.CNS drugs · 2021Pooled it
- Pharmacological interventions for self-harm in adults.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Survival, Attachment, and Healing: An Evolutionary Lens on Interventions for Trauma-Related Dissociation.Psychology research and behavior management · 2024Review
- Current Clinical Psychopharmacology in Borderline Personality Disorder.Current neuropharmacology · 2021Review
- Pharmacotherapy of Primary Impulsive Aggression in Violent Criminal Offenders.Frontiers in psychology · 2021Review
- Asenapine: an atypical antipsychotic with atypical formulations.Therapeutic advances in psychopharmacology · 2021Review
- Pharmacotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: an Update of Published, Unpublished and Ongoing Studies.Current psychiatry reports · 2020Review
- Transdermal Asenapine in Schizophrenia: A Systematic Review.Patient preference and adherence · 2020Review
- Asenapine in the management of impulsivity and aggressiveness in bipolar disorder and comorbid borderline personality disorder: an open-label uncontrolled study.International clinical psychopharmacology · 2018Observational
- Targeting Serotonin 5-HTAggression and violent behaviorArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAsenapine is a new second-generation antipsychotic that is understudied in borderline personality disorder (BPD). Only one study investigating the use of the drug in this indication (an open-label pilot study) has been conducted to date.
objectiveThe present open-label, randomized, controlled trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of asenapine in comparison with olanzapine, the most broadly studied antipsychotic in BPD.
methodsA total of 51 outpatients aged between 18 and 50 years with a diagnosis of BPD based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria were assigned for 12 weeks to asenapine (5-10 mg/day) or olanzapine (5-10 mg/day). Participants were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks with the following instruments: the Clinical Global Impression Scale, Severity item (CGI-S), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Social Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index (BPDSI), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, version 11 (BIS-11), Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS), Self-Harm Inventory (SHI), and Dosage Record and Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale (DOTES). Analysis of variance repeated measures was performed. Intention-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was conducted.
resultsThere were 11 drop-outs (21.57%): six patients taking asenapine and five patients receiving olanzapine. Two patients who received asenapine stopped the drug, one due to oral hypoesthesia and the other due to moderate anxiety. Two patients receiving olanzapine discontinued the treatment because of significant weight gain (≥3 kg). The remaining seven drop-outs resulted from the lack of compliance with the trial prescription. Forty out of the 51 patients (78%) completed the trial: 19 patients received asenapine, while 21 patients received olanzapine. We found a significant within-subject effect (trial duration) for all rating scales, except from the HAM-D, the MOAS, and two items of the BPDSI, namely, "identity disturbance" and "parasuicidal behaviors." A significant effect between subjects was found for the two items of the BPDSI "affective instability" and "dissociation/paranoid ideation." Asenapine was found superior to olanzapine in reducing the affective instability score (P = 0.001), whereas olanzapine was found superior to asenapine in reducing dissociation/paranoid ideation (P = 0.012). However, the study was found to be underpowered to detect a difference between the drugs on the dissociation/paranoid ideation item of the BPDSI. Two patients receiving asenapine experienced akathisia and another two restlessness/anxiety, while three patients receiving olanzapine reported somnolence and two fatigue.
conclusionsAsenapine and olanzapine were demonstrated to have a similar efficacy. While asenapine was found to be more efficacious than olanzapine in treating affective instability, olanzapine was superior to asenapine in treating paranoid ideation and dissociation. However, the study was underpowered to detect a difference between groups on the dissociation/paranoid ideation item. Both medications were well tolerated, with asenapine being related to a higher frequency of oral hypoesthesia and akathisia, and olanzapine being prone to induce weight gain. The open-label study design, lack of a placebo group, and small sample size constitute major limitations of this trial. Our findings need to be replicated in further studies. Clinical Trials Registry code: ACTRN12614000551695.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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 OpenQuestion graph.