12-week double-blind randomized multicenter study of efficacy and safety of agomelatine (25-50 mg/day) versus escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) in out-patients with severe generalized anxiety disorder.

Treatment of severely symptomatic patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) raises particular concerns for clinicians. This 12-week double-blind study evaluated the efficacy of agomelatine (25-50 mg/day) in the treatment of patients with severe GAD, using escitalopram (10-20 mg) as active comparator. The primary outcome measure was the change from baseline of the total score on the Hamilton Anxiety scale (HAM-A) at week 12. Secondary outcome measures included rate of response to treatment (at least 50% score reduction from baseline) in the HAM-A psychic and somatic anxiety sub-scores, Clinical Global Impression severity and change scores, the Toronto Hospital Alertness Test, the Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale, and the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire Scores. Sixty one clinical centers (Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Finland, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Russia, Slovakia) participated from April 2013 to February 2015. Patient characteristics and demographic data were comparable between treatment groups. Both treatments were associated with a clinically significant decrease in HAM-A total score at week 12; the non-inferiority of agomelatine versus escitalopram was not demonstrated (E(SE) = -0.91(0.69), 95%CI = [-2.26, 0.44], p = 0.195). At week 12, the response rate was 60.9% in the agomelatine group, and 64.8% in the escitalopram group. In both treatment arms, HAM-A psychic and somatic anxiety scores decreased, alertness and sleep parameters improved, and ability to experience pleasure increased. In these secondary outcome measures, there were no significant differences between the treatment groups. Agomelatine was well-tolerated, with a lower incidence of adverse events than escitalopram. Agomelatine and escitalopram are efficacious in treating GAD patients with severe symptoms.

Efficacy of Tianeptine 25-50 mg in Elderly Patients With Recurrent Major Depressive Disorder: An 8-Week Placebo- and Escitalopram-Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: The present placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8 weeks of treatment with tianeptine 25-50 mg/d in elderly patients suffering from major depressive disorder (MDD) according to DSM-IV-TR. Escitalopram 5-10 mg/d was used as an active comparator. METHODS: Elderly outpatients aged at least 65 years with a primary diagnosis of moderate to severe episode of recurrent MDD were recruited by psychiatrists in 44 clinical centers in 10 countries from October 2013 to January 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tianeptine (n = 105), placebo (n = 107), or escitalopram (n = 99) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) total score. RESULTS: Tianeptine improved depressive symptoms, as evaluated by the HDRS17 total score in terms of absolute change from baseline (week 0) to week 8 (placebo-tianeptine difference [SE] of 3.84 [0.85] points, P < .001, using a last-observation-carried-forward approach) and response to treatment (tianeptine: 46.7%; placebo: 34.0%, estimate [SE] = 12.70% [6.70], P = .06). A sensitivity analysis using a mixed model for repeated measures confirmed the main results on HDRS total s​core. The placebo-tianeptine difference (SE) was 0.66 (0.15) for Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; P < .001) and 0.57 (0.14) for Clinical Global Impressions- Improvement (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.83; P < .001). Positive results were also obtained with the active control escitalopram (HDRS17 total score placebo-escitalopram difference of 4.09 ± 0.86 points, P < .001), therefore validating the sensitivity of the studied population. Tianeptine was well tolerated, with only minimal differences in tolerability from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides robust evidence that an 8-week treatment period with tianeptine 25-50 mg is efficacious and well tolerated in depressed patients aged 65 years or older. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT identifier: 2012-005612-26​.

Effect of agomelatine 25-50 mg on functional outcomes in patients with major depressive disorder.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this work is to investigate the effect of agomelatine on functioning compared with placebo in patients suffering from Major Depressive Disorder (MDD). METHODS: Data from two randomized, parallel, double-blind, placebo-controlled short-term agomelatine trials conducted by the manufacturer, one in adult and one in older patients, that evaluated the effect on social functioning, were pooled. The short term effect of agomelatine on social functioning was assessed using the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS), according to SDS total and sub-item scores, as well as on functional response and remission rates. The Hamilton Depression rating scale was used to quantify severity of depression symptoms. A meta-analytic method using a random effect model was used to assess differences in treatment. RESULTS: In total, 633 patients (422 on agomelatine; 211 on placebo) were included in the analyses. At endpoint, there was a significant difference in favor of agomelatine vs placebo of 3.47 (0.62) (95% confidence interval: [2.26; 4.67]; P < 0.001) on the SDS total score. Rates of symptomatic response and remission according to HAM-D17 total score were significantly higher in patients taking agomelatine (54.3% and 18.3% respectively) than in those taking placebo (29.4% and 9.5% respectively) with respective differences of 24.9%, p < 0.001 and 9.3%, p < 0.001. The functional response rates were 52.9% on agomelatine and 34.5% on placebo, with a significant placebo-agomelatine difference in favor of agomelatine of 18.30 ±â€¯4.39% (95% CI: [9.69; 26.91], p < 0.001). The functional remission rates were 22.3% with agomelatine and 10.2% with placebo, with a significant difference in favor of agomelatine of 11.7 ±â€¯3.11% (95% CI: [5.61; 17.79], p < 0.001). Combined symptomatic and functional response rates were 42.1% on agomelatine and 23.2% on placebo (p < 0.001), and the combined symptomatic and functional remission rates were 13.9% on agomelatine and 6.8% on placebo (p < 0.005). CONCLUSION: This study confirms the efficacy of agomelatine in improving social functioning in MDD patients.

Efficacy and safety of agomelatine (10 or 25 mg/day) in non-depressed out-patients with generalized anxiety disorder: A 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

Agomelatine is efficacious in reducing symptoms and preventing relapse in placebo-controlled trials in generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). Nevertheless, fixed dose studies of agomelatine in GAD have not been undertaken. To determine the minimally effective optimal dose of agomelatine in GAD, the efficacy of two doses of agomelatine (10 and 25mg/day) was investigated in a 12-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind, international study in patients with a primary diagnosis of GAD. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Anxiety scale (HAM-A). The study was undertaken in 35 clinical centers in Finland, Russia, Poland, Slovakia and Ukraine from August 2013 to January 2015. 131 out-patients were included in the agomelatine 10mg group, 139 in the agomelatine 25mg group, and 142 in the placebo group. Both doses of agomelatine were associated with significant decreases in the HAM-A at week 12 (difference versus placebo of 7.16±1.00 at 10mg and 11.08±0.98 at 25mg, p<0.0001). Significant effects on all secondary measures were found for both doses at week 12; including psychic and somatic HAM-A subscales, response rate, remission on the HAM-A, and functional impairment. Findings were confirmed in subsets of more severely ill patients on all endpoints. The low placebo response rate observed in this study was consistent with an increase in the quality of data collected. Agomelatine was well-tolerated by patients, with minimal distinctions from placebo. There was a dose effect of agomelatine, with a greater placebo-agomelatine difference in the agomelatine 25mg group, compared to the agomelatine 10mg group.The present data support early work indicating the efficacy and tolerability of agomelatine in the treatment of GAD.

Agomelatine in generalized anxiety disorder: an active comparator and placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Agomelatine was efficacious in reducing symptoms in a short-term placebo-controlled trial in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and in preventing relapse in a longer term placebo-controlled study. An additional short-term placebo-controlled study is required by regulatory agencies to confirm the efficacy of agomelatine in GAD. METHOD: This 12-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind, randomized, parallel group, international, multicenter study was designed to confirm the efficacy of agomelatine 25-50 mg/d in the treatment of patients with a primary DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of GAD. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) total score. Assay sensitivity was evaluated by including an escitalopram (10-20 mg/d) group. SETTINGS: The study was undertaken in 45 clinical centers in Argentina, Czech Republic, Finland, South Korea, Poland, Russia, and Slovakia from April 2010 to July 2011. RESULTS: One hundred thirty-nine outpatients were included in the agomelatine group, 131 in the placebo group, and 142 in the escitalopram group. Agomelatine significantly reduced mean (SD) HARS total score (agomelatine-placebo difference: 4.71 [1.03], P <.0001) and had significant effects on secondary outcome measures, including psychic and somatic HARS subscales, response rate (estimate [standard error]) (agomelatine-placebo difference: 27.4% [5.9%], P< .0001), remission on the HARS (agomelatine-placebo difference: 16.8% [5.4%], P = .002), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) (P < .001), functional impairment (P < .0001), and sleep quality (P < .001). Findings were confirmed in the subset of more severely ill patients (HARS total score ≥ 25 with or without CGI-S ≥ 5 at baseline). Agomelatine was well tolerated by patients, with no more adverse events than placebo. Escitalopram was similarly efficacious but was accompanied by a higher incidence of adverse events compared to placebo. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, agomelatine has at least similar efficacy to that of escitalopram for the short-term treatment of GAD and is well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com identifier: ISRCTN03554974.

The efficacy of agomelatine in elderly patients with recurrent major depressive disorder: a placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The present placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of 8-week treatment with agomelatine (25-50 mg/d by mouth) in elderly patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Elderly outpatients aged ≥ 65 years with a primary diagnosis of moderate to severe episode of recurrent MDD (DSM-IV-TR) were recruited in 27 clinical centers in Argentina, Finland, Mexico, Portugal, and Romania from November 2009 to October 2011. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) total score. RESULTS: A total of 222 elderly patients entered the study (151 in the agomelatine group, 71 in the placebo group), including 69 patients aged 75 years and older. Agomelatine improved depressive symptoms in the elderly population, as evaluated by the HDRS17 total score, in terms of last postbaseline value (agomelatine-placebo difference: mean estimate [standard error] = 2.67 [1.06] points; P = .013) and response to treatment (agomelatine, 59.5%; placebo, 38.6%; P = .004). The agomelatine-placebo difference according to the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale (CGI-S) score was 0.48 (0.19). The agomelatine-placebo difference (estimate [standard error]) for remission on the HDRS17 was 6.9% (4.7%) and did not achieve statistical significance (P = .179, post hoc analysis). Clinically relevant effects of agomelatine were confirmed on all end points in the subset of severely depressed patients (HDRS17 total score ≥ 25 and CGI-S score ≥ 5 at baseline). Agomelatine was well tolerated by patients, with only minimal distinctions from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides the first evidence that an 8-week treatment with agomelatine 25-50 mg/d efficiently relieves depressive symptoms and is well tolerated in elderly depressed patients older than 65 years. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Controlled-Trials.com identifier: ISRCTN57507360.

Agomelatine prevents relapse in generalized anxiety disorder: a 6-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled discontinuation study.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of agomelatine in the prevention of relapse in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHOD: Patients with GAD (Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale [HARS] ≥ 22, with items 1 and 2 ≥ 2, item 1 + 2 ≥ 5; Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] ≤ 16; and < 20% decrease in HARS total score between screening and baseline) who responded to a 16-week course of agomelatine 25-50 mg/d treatment were randomly assigned to receive continuation treatment with agomelatine (n = 113) or placebo (n = 114) for 26 weeks. The main outcome measure was time to relapse during this maintenance period. The estimated risk of relapse was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and groups were compared using a log-rank test stratified for country. The study was undertaken in 31 clinical centers in Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, Hungary, and Sweden from November 2007 to September 2009. RESULTS: During the 6-month maintenance period, the proportion of patients that relapsed during the double-blind period in the agomelatine group (22 patients, 19.5%) was lower than in the placebo group (35 patients, 30.7%). The risk of relapse over time was significantly lower for patients who continued treatment than for those switched to placebo (P = .046, log-rank test stratified for country). Agomelatine was also superior to placebo in preventing relapse in the subset of more severe patients with baseline HARS total score ≥ 25 and CGI-S score ≥ 5. The tolerability of agomelatine was good throughout the study, and there were no differences in discontinuation symptoms after withdrawal of agomelatine in comparison to maintenance on agomelatine. CONCLUSIONS: The present study extends the positive findings of an earlier short-term study of agomelatine in GAD, demonstrating that agomelatine is effective and well-tolerated in the longer-term treatment of this chronic disorder. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.isrctn.org identifier: ISRCTN38094599.

Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR): a once-daily monotherapy effective in generalized anxiety disorder. Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study.

The efficacy and tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) once-daily monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) was assessed. This multicentre, double-blind, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, phase III trial consisted of a 1- to 4-wk enrolment/wash-out period and a 10-wk (8-wk active treatment, 2-wk post-treatment drug-discontinuation) study period; 873 patients were randomized to 50 mg or 150 mg quetiapine XR, 20 mg paroxetine, or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) total score. At week 8, all active agents produced significant improvements in HAMA total and psychic subscale scores vs. placebo; HAMA somatic subscale scores were significantly reduced only by 150 mg quetiapine XR. Significant separation from placebo (-2.90) in HAMA total score was observed at day 4 for 50 mg quetiapine XR (-4.43, p<0.001) and 150 mg quetiapine XR (-3.86, p<0.05), but not for paroxetine (-2.69). Remission (HAMA total score 7) rates at week 8 were significantly higher for 150 mg quetiapine XR (42.6%, p<0.01) and paroxetine (38.8%, p<0.05) vs. placebo (27.2%). The most common adverse events (AEs) were dry mouth, somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, and headache, for quetiapine XR, and nausea, headache, dizziness for paroxetine. A lower proportion of patients reported sexual dysfunction with quetiapine XR [0.9% (50 mg), 1.8% (150 mg)] than with placebo (2.3%) or paroxetine (7.4%). The incidence of AEs potentially related to extrapyramidal symptoms was: quetiapine XR: 50 mg, 6.8%, 150 mg, 5.0%; placebo, 1.8%; and paroxetine, 8.4%. Once-daily quetiapine XR is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for patients with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early as day 4.

The DSM-IV-based Generalized Anxiety Disorder Severity Scale: preliminary validation using data from a trial of agomelatine versus placebo.

Currently available symptom severity measures for Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD) are not optimal. This study investigates the reliability and validity of a new measure for GAD. The Generalized Anxiety Disorder Severity Scale (DGSS), comprising 8 DSM-IV GAD symptoms assessed in terms of frequency and intensity, was used in a trial of agomelatine versus placebo for the treatment of GAD. Internal reliability, concurrent validity, responsiveness to change, most robust items, and factor structure were computed. The DGSS demonstrated good internal reliability, correlated significantly with the Hamilton Anxiety Scale and Clinical Global Impression severity scale, and demonstrated a clear change in response to agomelatine. The most robust DGSS items were derived, and an exploratory factor analysis yielded a 2-factor structure of the DGSS. The DGSS is potentially a useful scale for the assessment of GAD in clinical trials of this disorder.

Efficacy of agomelatine in generalized anxiety disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Agomelatine is a novel agent that acts on melatonergic (MT(1), MT(2)) receptors and serotonergic (5-HT(2C)) receptors. Preclinical data and data from clinical trials in major depression suggest that agomelatine may have anxiolytic properties. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was designed to assess the efficacy of agomelatine in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHODS: One hundred twenty-one patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition GAD and no comorbid disorders were randomized to agomelatine (25-50 mg/d) or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, whereas secondary outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impression scales, the Leeds Sleep Evaluation Questionnaire, and the Sheehan Disability Scale. Safety measures included assessment of spontaneously reported adverse events, laboratory monitoring, and the Discontinuation Emergent Signs and Symptoms Scale to evaluate discontinuation symptoms. RESULTS: Analysis of covariance of change in the last Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale total score from baseline demonstrated significant superiority of agomelatine 25 to 50 mg as compared with placebo (E [SE] = -3.28 [1.58]; 95% confidence interval = -6.41 to -0.15; P = 0.040). Data on secondary outcome measures, including clinical response, symptoms of insomnia, and improvement in associated disability, were consistent with the efficacy of agomelatine. Safety analysis indicated that agomelatine was tolerated as well as placebo and was devoid of discontinuation emergent symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that agomelatine is effective in the treatment of GAD and is well tolerated. Additional trials, using an active comparator and extending over a longer period, are needed to delineate the place of agomelatine in the contemporary pharmacotherapy for anxiety disorders.

Venlafaxine extended-release capsules in panic disorder: flexible-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Venlafaxine extended-release (ER) has proven efficacy in the treatment of anxiety symptoms in major depression, generalised anxiety disorder and social anxiety disorder. AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of venlafaxine ER in treating panic disorder. METHOD: Adult out-patients (n=361) with panic disorder were randomly assigned to receive venlafaxine ER (75-225 mg/day) or placebo for up to 10 weeks in a double-blind study. RESULTS: Venlafaxine ER was not associated with a greater proportion of patients free from full-symptom panic attacks at the final on-therapy evaluation, but was associated with lower mean panic attack frequency and a higher proportion free from limited-symptom panic attacks, higher response and remission rates, and improvements in anticipatory anxiety, fear and avoidance. Adverse events were comparable with those of the drug in depression and anxiety disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Venlafaxine ER seems to be effective and well tolerated in the short-term treatment of panic disorder.

Deramciclane in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder: a placebo-controlled, double-blind, dose-finding study.

Deramciclane, a camphor derivative, is a novel anxiolytic agent with a unique mechanism of action. It acts as a potent and specific antagonist at serotonin 5-HT2A/2C receptors, and exhibits anxiolytic efficacy in animal models. The aim of this double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a range of doses of deramciclane in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Adult patients with a diagnosis of GAD (DSM-IV) and a Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score >or=18; a score >or=2 for the HAM-A items 'Anxious Mood' and 'Tension'; a score >or=4 on the Clinical Global Impression of Severity of Illness (CGI-S) Scale; and a score

Neopterin and macrophage inflammatory protein-1alpha in the cerebrospinal fluid of schizophrenic patients: no evidence of intrathecal inflammation.

BACKGROUND: Numerous reports support the idea that inflammatory and/or immunological processes contribute to the etiopathogenesis of schizophrenia. Most of the data are, however, based on findings from body compartments outside the central nervous system (CNS). We measured the concentrations of the inflammatory marker neopterin and the chemokine macrophage inflammatory protein-alpha (MIP-1alpha) in the cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) of acutely psychotic schizophrenic patients and of healthy controls. METHODS: The concentration of neopterin was measured in the CSF of 11 schizophrenic patients by radioimmunoassay, and of MIP-1alpha in the CSF from 8 patients using ELISA. Control CSF was collected from 10 and 8 healthy individuals. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences in CSF neopterin or MIP-1alpha were detected between patients and controls or between the patient samples obtained on hospital admission and after the treatment period associated with clinical improvement. CONCLUSIONS: These findings argue against the hypothesis that active inflammatory processes are part of the pathophysiology of acute psychotic episodes in schizophrenia. The possible mechanisms explaining the previously reported aberrations of mononuclear cells and cytokines in schizophrenia are discussed.