An overview of the pathophysiology of agitation in Alzheimer's dementia with a focus on neurotransmitters and circuits.

Alzheimer's dementia (AD) is a progressive, neurodegenerative disease often accompanied by neuropsychiatric symptoms that profoundly impact both patients and caregivers. Agitation is among the most prevalent and distressing of these symptoms and often requires treatment. Appropriate therapeutic interventions depend on understanding the biological basis of agitation and how it may be affected by treatment. This narrative review discusses a proposed pathophysiology of agitation in Alzheimer's dementia based on convergent evidence across research approaches. Available data indicate that agitation in Alzheimer's dementia is associated with an imbalance of activity between key prefrontal and subcortical brain regions. The monoamine neurotransmitter systems serve as key modulators of activity within these brain regions and circuits and are rendered abnormal in AD. Patients with AD who exhibited agitation symptoms during life have alterations in neurotransmitter nuclei and related systems when the brain is examined at autopsy. The authors present a model of agitation in Alzheimer's dementia in which noradrenergic hyperactivity along with serotonergic deficits and dysregulated striatal dopamine release contribute to agitated and aggressive behaviors.

Trial of Solanezumab for Mild Dementia Due to Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: Alzheimer's disease is characterized by amyloid-beta (Aß) plaques and neurofibrillary tangles. The humanized monoclonal antibody solanezumab was designed to increase the clearance from the brain of soluble Aß, peptides that may lead to toxic effects in the synapses and precede the deposition of fibrillary amyloid. METHODS: We conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial involving patients with mild dementia due to Alzheimer's disease, defined as a Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score of 20 to 26 (on a scale from 0 to 30, with higher scores indicating better cognition) and with amyloid deposition shown by means of florbetapir positron-emission tomography or Aß1-42 measurements in cerebrospinal fluid. Patients were randomly assigned to receive solanezumab at a dose of 400 mg or placebo intravenously every 4 weeks for 76 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline to week 80 in the score on the 14-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog14; scores range from 0 to 90, with higher scores indicating greater cognitive impairment). RESULTS: A total of 2129 patients were enrolled, of whom 1057 were assigned to receive solanezumab and 1072 to receive placebo. The mean change from baseline in the ADAS-cog14 score was 6.65 in the solanezumab group and 7.44 in the placebo group, with no significant between-group difference at week 80 (difference, -0.80; 95% confidence interval, -1.73 to 0.14; P=0.10). As a result of the failure to reach significance with regard to the primary outcome in the prespecified hierarchical analysis, the secondary outcomes were considered to be descriptive and are reported without significance testing. The change from baseline in the MMSE score was -3.17 in the solanezumab group and -3.66 in the placebo group. Adverse cerebral edema or effusion lesions that were observed on magnetic resonance imaging after randomization occurred in 1 patient in the solanezumab group and in 2 in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Solanezumab at a dose of 400 mg administered every 4 weeks in patients with mild Alzheimer's disease did not significantly affect cognitive decline. (Funded by Eli Lilly; EXPEDITION3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01900665 .).

A phase 3, long-term, open-label safety study of Galcanezumab in patients with migraine.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to the calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated in previous Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical studies (≤6-month of treatment) a reduction in the number of migraine headache days and improved patients' functioning. This study evaluated the safety and tolerability, as well as the effectiveness of galcanezumab for up to 12 months of treatment in patients with migraine. METHODS: Patients diagnosed with episodic or chronic migraine, 18 to 65 years old, that were not exposed previously to galcanezumab, were randomized to receive galcanezumab 120 mg or 240 mg, administered subcutaneously once monthly for a year. Safety and tolerability were evaluated by frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and adverse events (AEs) leading to study discontinuation. Laboratory values, vital signs, electrocardiograms, and suicidality were also analyzed. Additionally, overall change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days, functioning, and disability were assessed. RESULTS: One hundred thirty five patients were randomized to each galcanezumab dose group. The majority of patients were female (> 80%) and on average were 42 years old with 10.6 migraine headache days per month at baseline. 77.8% of the patients completed the open-label treatment phase, 3.7% of patients experienced an SAE, and 4.8% discontinued due to AEs. TEAEs with a frequency ≥ 10% of patients in either dose group were injection site pain, nasopharyngitis, upper respiratory tract infection, injection site reaction, back pain, and sinusitis. Laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiograms did not show anyclinically meaningful differences between galcanezumab dosesOverall mean reduction in monthly migraine headache days over 12 months for the galcanezumab dose groups were 5.6 (120 mg) and 6.5 (240 mg). Level of functioning was improved and headache-related disability was reduced in both dose groups. CONCLUSION: Twelve months of treatment with self-administered injections of galcanezumab was safe and associated with a reduction in the number of monthly migraine headache days. Safety and tolerability of the 2 galcanezumab dosing regimens were comparable. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT02614287 , posted November 15, 2015. These data were previously presented as a poster at the International Headache Congress 2017: PO-01-184, Late-Breaking Abstracts of the 2017 International Headache Congress. (2017). Cephalalgia, 37(1_suppl), 319-374.

Longitudinal study to assess antidepressant treatment patterns and outcomes in individuals with depression in the general population.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is largely managed in primary care, but physicians vary widely in their understanding of symptoms and treatments. This study aims to better understand the evolution of depression from initial diagnosis over a 3-year period. METHODS: This was a noninterventional, retrospective, longitudinal study, with 2 waves of participant interviews approximately 3 years apart. Phone interviews were conducted using the hybrid artificial intelligence (AI) Sleep-EVAL system, an AI-driven diagnostic deep learning tool. Participants were noninstitutionalized adults representative of the general population in 8 US states. Diagnosis was confirmed according to the DSM-5 using the Sleep-EVAL System. RESULTS: 10,931 participants completed Wave 1 and 2 (W1, W2) interviews. The prevalence of MDD, including partial and complete remission, was 13.4 % and 19.6 % in W1 and W2, respectively. About 42 % of MDD participants at W1 continued to report depressive symptoms at W2. Approximately half of antidepressant (AD) users in W1 were moderately to completely dissatisfied with their treatment; 29.6 % changed their AD for a different one, with 16.4 % switching from one SSRI to another between W1 and W2. Primary care physicians were the top AD prescribers, both in W1 (45.7 %) and W2 (59%), respectively. LIMITATIONS: Data collected relied on self-reporting by participants. As such, the interpretation of the data may be limited. CONCLUSIONS: Depression affects a sizeable portion of the US population. Dissatisfaction with treatment, frequent switching of ADs, and changing care providers are associated with low rates of remission. Residual symptoms remain a challenge that future research must address.

Comprehensive population-based survey of migraine in Japan: results of the ObserVational Survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment, and Care Of MigrainE (OVERCOME [Japan]) study.

OBJECTIVE: The ObserVational survey of the Epidemiology, tReatment, and Care Of MigrainE study in Japan (OVERCOME [Japan]) aimed to provide an up-to-date assessment of migraine epidemiology in Japan. METHODS: OVERCOME (Japan) was a cross-sectional, population-based web survey of Japanese adults recruited from consumer panels. People with active migraine (met modified International Classification of Headache Disorders, 3rd edition [ICHD-3] criteria or had a self-reported physician diagnosis of migraine) answered questions about headache features, physician consultation patterns, and migraine medication use. The burden and impact of migraine were assessed using Migraine Disability Assessment (MIDAS) and Work Productivity and Activity Impairment scales. RESULTS: In total, 231,747 respondents accessed the screener, provided consent, and were eligible for the survey. The migraine group included 17,071 respondents (mean ± SD age 40.7 ± 13.0 years; 66.5% female). ICHD-3 migraine criteria were met by 14,033 (82.2%) respondents; 9667 (56.6%) self-reported a physician diagnosis of migraine. The mean number of monthly headache days was 4.5 ± 5.7 and pain severity (0-10 scale) was 5.1 ± 2.2. In the migraine group, 20.7% experienced moderate to severe migraine-related disability (MIDAS score ≥ 11). Work productivity loss was 36.2% of work time missed, including 34.3% presenteeism. Only 57.4% of respondents had ever sought medical care for migraine/severe headache. Most respondents (75.2%) were currently using over-the-counter medications for migraine; 36.7% were using prescription nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and only 14.8% were using triptans. Very few (9.2%) used preventive medications. CONCLUSIONS: Unmet needs for migraine health care among people with migraine in Japan include low rates of seeking care and suboptimal treatment.

Lanabecestat: Neuroimaging results in early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Lanabecestat, a beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) inhibitor, was investigated as a potential Alzheimer's disease (AD)-modifying treatment. As previously reported, amyloid beta (Aß) neuritic plaque burden reduction did not result in clinical benefit. Lanabecestat's effects on neuroimaging biomarkers and correlations between neuroimaging biomarkers and efficacy measures are reported. METHODS: AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were 104- and 78-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of lanabecestat in early symptomatic AD (AMARANTH) and mild AD dementia (DAYBREAK-ALZ). Patients randomly (1:1:1) received placebo, lanabecestat 20 mg, or lanabecestat 50 mg daily (AMARANTH, n = 2218; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 1722). Florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET), fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET, flortaucipir PET, and volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to measure Aß neuritic plaque burden, cerebral metabolism, aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangles, and brain volume, respectively. Additionally, florbetapir perfusion scans were performed in DAYBREAK-ALZ. Efficacy measures included 13-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes, Functional Activities Questionnaire, and Mini-Mental State Examination. These studies stopped early due to futility. RESULTS: Despite previously observed annualized reduction in Aß neuritic plaque burden, there were no treatment differences in annualized change of aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden (AMARANTH, n = 284; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 70), cerebral metabolism (AMARANTH, n = 260; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 38) and perfusion (DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 213). Greater brain volume reduction (AMARANTH, n = 1697 [whole brain]; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 650 [whole brain]) occurred on lanabecestat compared to placebo. Higher baseline aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden, lower cerebral metabolism, and lower brain volumes correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores and greater clinical worsening. Lower baseline cerebral perfusion correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores. Reduction in cerebral metabolism or whole brain volume correlated with clinical worsening, regardless of treatment assignment. DISCUSSION: Tau pathology and cerebral metabolism assessments showed no evidence of lanabecestat slowing pathophysiologic progression of AD. Lanabecestat exposure was associated with brain volume reductions. Correlations between imaging measures and cognitive assessments may aid future study design.

Efficacy and Safety of Lanabecestat for Treatment of Early and Mild Alzheimer Disease: The AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive deterioration and impaired activities of daily living. Current treatments provide only minor symptomatic improvements with limited benefit duration. Lanabecestat, a brain-permeable inhibitor of human beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1/ß-secretase), was developed to modify the clinical course of AD by slowing disease progression. Objective: To assess whether lanabecestat slows the progression of AD compared with placebo in patients with early AD (mild cognitive impairment) and mild AD dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: AMARANTH (first patient visit on September 30, 2014; last patient visit on October 4, 2018) and DAYBREAK-ALZ (first patient visit on July 1, 2016; last patient visit on September 28, 2018) were randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2/3 and phase 3 clinical trials lasting 104 weeks and 78 weeks, respectively. AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were multicenter, global, double-blind studies conducted at 257 and 251 centers, respectively, located in 15 and 18 countries or territories, respectively. A population-based sample of men and women aged 55 to 85 years who met National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria for early AD or mild AD dementia was screened using cognitive assessments, and the presence of amyloid was confirmed. Patients were excluded for unstable medical conditions or medication use, significant cerebrovascular pathologic findings, or a history of vitiligo and/or current evidence of postinflammatory hypopigmentation. AMARANTH screened 6871 patients; 2218 (32.3%) were randomized, and 539 patients completed the study. DAYBREAK-ALZ screened 5706 patients; 1722 (30.2%) were randomized, and 76 patients completed the study. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily oral doses of lanabecestat (20 mg), lanabecestat (50 mg), or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was change from baseline on the 13-item Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale. Secondary outcomes included Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Efficacy analyses were conducted on the intent-to-treat population. Results: Among 2218 AMARANTH patients, the mean (SD) age was 71.3 (7.1) years, and 1177 of 2218 (53.1%) were women. Among 1722 DAYBREAK-ALZ patients, the mean (SD) age was 72.3 (7.0) years, and 1023 of 1722 (59.4%) were women. Both studies were terminated early after futility analysis. There were no consistent, reproducible dose-related findings on primary or secondary efficacy measures. Psychiatric adverse events, weight loss, and hair color changes were reported in a higher percentage of patients receiving lanabecestat than placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with lanabecestat was well tolerated and did not slow cognitive or functional decline. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02245737 and NCT02783573.

Galcanezumab in chronic migraine: The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled REGAIN study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, in the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. METHODS: A phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of LY2951742 in patients with chronic migraine (Evaluation of Galcanezumab in the Prevention of Chronic Migraine [REGAIN]) was a phase 3 study with a 3-month double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment phase and a 9-month open-label extension. Eligible patients 18 to 65 years of age with chronic migraine were randomized 2:1:1 to monthly subcutaneous injections of placebo (n = 558), galcanezumab 120 mg (with a 240-mg loading dose, n = 278), or galcanezumab 240 mg (n = 277). The primary endpoint was the overall mean change from baseline in the number of monthly migraine headache days (MHDs) during the 3-month double-blind treatment phase. RESULTS: Mean number of monthly MHDs at baseline was 19.4 for the total sample. Both galcanezumab dose groups demonstrated greater overall mean reduction in the number of monthly MHDs compared to placebo (placebo -2.7, galcanezumab 120 mg -4.8, galcanezumab 240 mg -4.6) (p < 0.001 for each dose compared to placebo). There were no clinically meaningful differences between galcanezumab doses and placebo on any safety or tolerability outcome except for a higher incidence of treatment-emergent injection-site reaction (p < 0.01), injection-site erythema (p < 0.001), injection-site pruritus (p < 0.01), and sinusitis (p < 0.05) in the galcanezumab 240-mg group relative to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Both doses of galcanezumab were superior to placebo in reducing the number of monthly MHDs. Galcanezumab appears efficacious, safe, and well tolerated for the preventive treatment of chronic migraine. CLINICALTRIALSGOV IDENTIFIER: NCT02614261. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This interventional study provides Class I evidence that galcanezumab is superior to placebo in the reduction of the number of monthly MHDs.

Comparison between prefilled syringe and autoinjector devices on patient-reported experiences and pharmacokinetics in galcanezumab studies.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the usability and patient-rated experiences of an autoinjector with a prefilled syringe in patients with migraine, who self-administered galcanezumab, and to compare pharmacokinetic parameters between these devices. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patient-rated experiences with an investigational autoinjector and a prefilled syringe were compared in an open-label, 12-month study of once-monthly injections of galcanezumab 120 or 240 mg (NCT02614287). Patient-rated ease of usability was assessed with the Subcutaneous Administration Assessment Questionnaire (SQAAQ) and compared between devices. Positive responses on the SQAAQ were rated as "agree or strongly agree" to 12 statements. Tolerability was assessed by the frequency of injection-site-related adverse events (AEs) by device and injection location. In a separate study, galcanezumab pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects was compared between the devices (NCT02836613). RESULTS: In the open-label clinical trial, 179 patients used both the prefilled syringe and autoinjector at least once. The majority of patients (91%-97%) had positive responses on the SQAAQ to the use of autoinjector across the items assessed. There were 23 injection-site-related AEs with the first self-administered injection with the prefilled syringe (N=7) or autoinjector (N=16; P=0.061), with the most common AE for either device being injection-site pain. There were no significant between-device differences in injection-site-related AEs. For pharmacokinetics, the 90% CI for the ratio (autoinjector/prefilled syringe) of geometric least-square means for the galcanezumab area under the curve (AUC) concentration and maximum concentration (Cmax) was between 0.8 and 1.25, indicating no statistically significant difference in the galcanezumab concentrations regardless of the device used. CONCLUSION: The ease of usability with either device was comparable, and there were no significant differences in tolerability between the prefilled syringe and autoinjector with the first self-administration; however, the analysis was not powered to detect a clinically significant difference. Galcanezumab pharmacokinetics were comparable between devices.

Cognitive Impairment Precedes and Predicts Functional Impairment in Mild Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: The temporal relationship of cognitive deficit and functional impairment in Alzheimer's disease (AD) is not well characterized. Recent analyses suggest cognitive decline predicts subsequent functional decline throughout AD progression. OBJECTIVE: To better understand the relationship between cognitive and functional decline in mild AD using autoregressive cross-lagged (ARCL) panel analyses in several clinical trials. METHODS: Data included placebo patients with mild AD pooled from two multicenter, double-blind, Phase 3 solanezumab (EXPEDITION/2) or semagacestat (IDENTITY/2) studies, and from AD patients participating in the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI). Cognitive and functional outcomes were assessed using AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog), AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living instrumental subscale (ADCS-iADL), or Functional Activities Questionnaire (FAQ), respectively. ARCL panel analyses evaluated relationships between cognitive and functional impairment over time. RESULTS: In EXPEDITION, ARCL panel analyses demonstrated cognitive scores significantly predicted future functional impairment at 5 of 6 time points, while functional scores predicted subsequent cognitive scores in only 1 of 6 time points. Data from IDENTITY and ADNI programs yielded consistent results whereby cognition predicted subsequent function, but not vice-versa. CONCLUSIONS: Analyses from three databases indicated cognitive decline precedes and predicts subsequent functional decline in mild AD dementia, consistent with previously proposed hypotheses, and corroborate recent publications using similar methodologies. Cognitive impairment may be used as a predictor of future functional impairment in mild AD dementia and can be considered a critical target for prevention strategies to limit future functional decline in the dementia process.