The effects of psilocybin on cognitive and emotional functions in healthy participants: Results from a phase 1, randomised, placebo-controlled trial involving simultaneous psilocybin administration and preparation.

BACKGROUND: Psilocybin, a psychoactive serotonin receptor partial agonist, has been reported to acutely reduce clinical symptoms of depressive disorders. Psilocybin's effects on cognitive function have not been widely or systematically studied. AIM: The aim of this study was to explore the safety of simultaneous administration of psilocybin to healthy participants in the largest randomised controlled trial of psilocybin to date. Primary and secondary endpoints assessed the short- and longer-term change in cognitive functioning, as assessed by a Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Panel, and emotional processing scales. Safety was assessed via endpoints which included cognitive function, assessed by CANTAB global composite score, and treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) monitoring. METHODS: In this phase 1, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, healthy participants (n = 89; mean age 36.1 years; 41 females, 48 males) were randomised to receive a single oral dose of 10 or 25 mg psilocybin, or placebo, administered simultaneously to up to six participants, with one-to-one psychological support - each participant having an assigned, dedicated therapist available throughout the session. RESULTS: In total, 511 TEAEs were reported, with a median duration of 1.0 day; 67% of all TEAEs started and resolved on the day of administration. There were no serious TEAEs, and none led to study withdrawal. There were no clinically relevant between-group differences in CANTAB global composite score, CANTAB cognitive domain scores, or emotional processing scale scores. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that 10 mg and 25 mg doses of psilocybin were generally well tolerated when given to up to six participants simultaneously and did not have any detrimental short- or long-term effects on cognitive functioning or emotional processing. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT (https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/) number: 2018-000978-30.

Team-based visits within Swedish child healthcare services: a national cross-sectional study.

Complex healthcare needs can be met through effective interprofessional collaboration. Since 2014, Swedish Child Healthcare Services (CHS) include universal team-based visits with a nurse and a physician who perform such visits at the age of 4 weeks, 6 months, 12 months, and 2.5 to 3 years, as well as targeted team-based visits to address additional needs. The aim of this study was to describe the prevalence of team-based visits in the Swedish CHS and possible associations between team-based visits and contextual factors that may affect its implementation. A national cross-sectional survey was conducted using a web-based questionnaire distributed to all reachable nurses, physicians, and psychologists (n =3,552) engaged in the CHS. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and binary and multivariate logistic regressions. The response rate was 32%. Team-based visits were reported by 82% of the respondents. For nurses and physicians, the most frequent indication was specific ages, while for psychologists it was to provide parental support. Respondents working at Family Centers were more likely to perform team-based visits in general, at 2.5 to 3 years and in case of additional needs, compared to respondents working at Child Health Centers (CHC) and other workplaces. In conclusion, team-based visits are well implemented, but the pattern differs depending on the contextual factors. Targeted team-based visits and team-based visits at the age of 2.5 to 3 years are most unequally implemented.

Predictors and trajectories of treatment response to SSRIs in patients suffering from PTSD.

Paroxetine and sertraline are the only FDA approved drugs for treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Although both drugs show better outcomes than placebo, not all patients benefit from treatment. We examined predictors and latent classes of SSRI treatment response in patients with PTSD. Symptom severity was measured over a 12-week period in 390 patients suffering from PTSD treated with open-label sertraline or paroxetine and a double-blinded placebo. First, growth curve modeling (GCM) was used to examine population-level predictors of treatment response. Second, growth mixture modeling (GMM) was used to group patients into latent classes based on their treatment response trajectories over time and to investigate predictors of latent class membership. Gender, childhood sexual trauma, and sexual assault as index trauma moderated the population-level treatment response using GCM. GMM identified three classes: fast responders, responders with low pretreatment symptom severity and responders with high pretreatment symptom severity. Class membership was predicted based on time since index trauma, severity of depression, and severity of anxiety. The study shows that higher severity of comorbid disorders does not result in an inferior response to treatment and suggests that patients with longer time since index trauma might particularly benefit from treatment with sertraline or paroxetine.

Post hoc analysis of a randomised, placebo-controlled, active-reference 6-week study of brexpiprazole in acute schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: We provide a closer look at the result of a randomised, placebo-controlled, active-reference (quetiapine XR), flexible-dose, 6-week study of brexpiprazole in schizophrenia, which did not meet its primary endpoint - change from baseline in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. We also investigate potential expectancy bias from the well-known side-effect profile of the active reference that could have affected the study outcome. METHODS: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses of the primary end point were performed using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) last observation carried forward (LOCF) and observed cases (OC). Post hoc analyses of change from baseline in PANSS total score were performed using the mixed model for repeated measures approach with treatment groups split by having typical adverse events with potential for functional unblinding, for example, somnolence, increase in weight, dizziness, dry mouth and sedation. RESULTS: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses showed separation from placebo for brexpiprazole at week 6: LOCF, ANCOVA: -4.3 [95% CI (-8.0, -0.5), p = 0.0254]. OC, ANCOVA: -3.9 [95% CI (-7.3, -0.5), p = 0.0260]. Patients treated with brexpiprazole experiencing typical adverse events with potential for functional unblinding before or at Week 2 had a least square (LS) mean PANSS change of -29.5 (improvement), with a difference in change from baseline to Week 6 in PANSS total score between brexpiprazole and placebo of -13.5 [95% CI (-23.1, -4.0), p = 0.0057], and those who did not had an LS mean change of -18.9 and a difference between brexpiprazole and placebo of -2.9 [95% CI (-7.2, 1.4), p = 0.1809]. CONCLUSION: Pre-specified sensitivity analyses showed separation from placebo for brexpiprazole at Week 6. A post hoc analysis suggested a potential confounding of efficacy rating towards symptom improvement in patients who experience known side effects of quetiapine XR.

Changes in Metabolic Parameters and Body Weight in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder Treated With Adjunctive Brexpiprazole: Pooled Analysis of Phase 3 Clinical Studies.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of adjunctive brexpiprazole on metabolic parameters and body weight in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) based on pooled data from 4 short-term studies and 1 long-term extension study. METHODS: The short-term studies (June 2011 to November 2016) were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV-TR criteria) and inadequate response to 1-3 prior antidepressant treatments (ADTs) plus 1 prospective ADT. Patients were randomized to adjunctive brexpiprazole (fixed or flexible doses in the range of 1-3 mg/d; n = 1,032) or placebo (n = 819) for 6 weeks. The long-term study (October 2011 to May 2017) was a 52-week (amended to 26 weeks), open-label, uncontrolled study of adjunctive brexpiprazole 0.5-3 mg/d (flexible dose; n = 2,938). Mean changes from baseline and categorical shifts in fasting metabolic parameters (cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose) and body weight were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean changes from baseline in metabolic parameters were small after 6 weeks (all < 2 mg/dL) and 52 weeks (all < 4 mg/dL, except triglycerides, 15.83 mg/dL) of treatment. In most cases, the incidence of unfavorable shifts in metabolic parameters was lower than the incidence of favorable shifts. Mean body weight increase at last visit in the short-term studies was 1.5 kg with ADT + brexpiprazole and 0.3 kg with ADT + placebo. During long-term treatment, mean body weight increased by 3.8 kg over 58 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive brexpiprazole was associated with small changes in metabolic parameters and moderate weight gain during short- and long-term treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506, NCT01727726, NCT01360866.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Engagement With mHealth Technology for Remote Measurement and Management of Depression: Qualitative Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Mobile technology has the potential to provide accurate, impactful data on the symptoms of depression, which could improve health management or assist in early detection of relapse. However, for this potential to be achieved, it is essential that patients engage with the technology. Although many barriers to and facilitators of the use of this technology are common across therapeutic areas and technology types, many may be specific to cultural and health contexts. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to determine the potential barriers to and facilitators of engagement with mobile health (mHealth) technology for remote measurement and management of depression across three Western European countries. METHODS: Participants (N=25; 4:1 ratio of women to men; age range, 25-73 years) who experienced depression participated in five focus groups held in three countries (two in the United Kingdom, two in Spain, and one in Italy). The focus groups investigated the potential barriers to and facilitators of the use of mHealth technology. A systematic thematic analysis was used to extract themes and subthemes. RESULTS: Facilitators and barriers were categorized as health-related factors, user-related factors, and technology-related factors. A total of 58 subthemes of specific barriers and facilitators or moderators emerged. A core group of themes including motivation, potential impact on mood and anxiety, aspects of inconvenience, and ease of use was noted across all countries. CONCLUSIONS: Similarities in the barriers to and facilitators of the use of mHealth technology have been observed across Spain, Italy, and the United Kingdom. These themes provide guidance on ways to promote the design of feasible and acceptable cross-cultural mHealth tools.

Adjunctive Brexpiprazole and Functioning in Major Depressive Disorder: A Pooled Analysis of Six Randomized Studies Using the Sheehan Disability Scale.

BACKGROUND: Patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments may experience a prolonged loss of functioning. This post hoc analysis aimed to determine the effect of adjunctive brexpiprazole on functioning in such patients. METHODS: A pooled analysis of data from the 6-week, randomized, double-blind treatment phases of 6 studies of adjunctive brexpiprazole (2 and 3 mg/d in fixed-dose studies; 1-3 mg/d in flexible-dose studies) vs placebo in patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments (NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506, NCT01727726, NCT00797966, NCT01052077). Functioning was measured by change in Sheehan Disability Scale score from baseline to week 6. RESULTS: Considering Sheehan Disability Scale mean score across all 6 studies (n = 2066 randomized), the least squares mean difference between antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole and antidepressant treatments + placebo at week 6 was -0.40 (95% CI: -0.56, -0.23; P < .0001). Antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole showed a greater benefit than antidepressant treatments + placebo on the social life (-0.45; -0.63, -0.27; P < .001) and family life (-0.50; -0.70, -0.31; P < .001) items but not on the work/studies item (-0.16; -0.38, 0.06; P = .16). Pooled analyses of just the (1) fixed-dose, (2) flexible-dose, and (3) Phase 3 studies showed the same pattern of benefits for antidepressant treatments + brexpiprazole. CONCLUSIONS: Brexpiprazole, as adjunct to antidepressant treatments, improved functioning in patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to antidepressant treatments.

Effect of Brexpiprazole on Prolactin: An Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies in Schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Hyperprolactinemia is an undesirable effect of most antipsychotics because of D2-receptor blockade. We assessed the effect of the D2-receptor partial agonist brexpiprazole on prolactin, based on pooled data from three 6-week, randomized, placebo-controlled studies and two open-label extension studies in patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: In the short-term studies, patients received 0.25, 1, 2, 4 mg brexpiprazole or placebo; or flexible-dose brexpiprazole (2-4 mg/d), placebo, or active reference. The extension studies were 52-week, flexible-dose (1-4 mg/d) studies. We studied changes from baseline and shifts in prolactin status in patients with normal or elevated prolactin levels at baseline, and prolactin-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). RESULTS: Median changes from baseline to week 6 in brexpiprazole-treated patients in short-term studies were as follows: 3.63 ng/mL (females), 0.26 ng/mL (males); placebo: -2.15 ng/mL (females), -1.08 ng/mL (males).Median changes from baseline to week 52 in long-term studies were 0.60 ng/mL (females) and 0.18 ng/mL (males). Prolactin levels in patients with baseline values greater than 1× upper limit of normal tended to decrease over time regardless of previous treatment.The proportions of brexpiprazole-treated patients with greater than 3× upper limit of normal postbaseline prolactin values in short-term studies were as follows: 1.5% (females), 1.6% (males); placebo: 3.6% (females), 3.4% (males). Corresponding figures in long-term studies were 5.3% (females) and 2.0% (males).In short-term studies, the incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs was 1.8% for brexpiprazole and 0.6% for placebo. In long-term studies, the incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs was 1.7%. CONCLUSIONS: Small changes in prolactin levels, low proportions of patients with postbaseline elevated prolactin values, and low incidence of prolactin-related TEAEs were observed after treatment with brexpiprazole.

Changes in metabolic parameters and body weight in brexpiprazole-treated patients with acute schizophrenia: pooled analyses of phase 3 clinical studies.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the effect of brexpiprazole on metabolic parameters and body weight in adults with schizophrenia, including clinically relevant sub-groups of patients, based on data from two pivotal phase 3 studies (NCT01393613; NCT01396421) and a long-term extension study (NCT01397786). METHODS: The short-term studies were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose (2 and 4 mg/day), 6-week phase 3 studies. The long-term study was an open-label 52-week study, recruiting de novo patients and those completing either short-term study. Maximum exposure to brexpiprazole was 58 weeks. Fasting metabolic parameters and weight were measured throughout the studies. Metabolic values were characterized as normal, borderline, or high (cholesterol, triglycerides, and glucose) and low or normal (HDL), using commonly reported thresholds. The incidences of all possible shifts in metabolic parameters were measured from baseline to any time post-baseline during the first 6 weeks, first 6 months, and last 6 months of treatment. RESULTS: In short-term studies, the proportion of brexpiprazole-treated patients with unfavorable shifts in metabolic parameters was low and like that of placebo-treated patients; the incidence of these shifts was not dose-dependent. During both short- and long-term treatment, the incidence of unfavorable shifts with brexpiprazole was lower than that of favorable shifts. During short-term studies, the mean increase in body weight was 1.2 kg with brexpiprazole treatment and 0.2 kg with placebo. The mean increase in body weight during long-term treatment was 3.2 kg at week 58. CONCLUSIONS: Brexpiprazole treatment was associated with moderate weight gain and small changes in metabolic parameters during both short- and long-term treatment.

Functioning outcomes with adjunctive treatments for major depressive disorder: a systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with inadequate response to antidepressant treatment (ADT) may suffer a prolonged loss of functioning. This review aimed to determine if self-rated functional measures are informative in randomized placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT. METHODS: This was a systematic literature review of articles in any language from the MEDLINE database published between January 1990 and March 2017. Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with MDD; inadequate response to at least one ADT; adjunctive therapy (pharmacological or otherwise) to ADT; placebo control group; randomized controlled trial or a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial; reported a self-rated functioning scale. Study characteristics and functioning efficacy data were extracted. RESULTS: A total of 2,090 discrete records were screened, 293 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 26 studies were included. All studies were acute (6-12 weeks) except for one 52-week study. The only self-rated functioning scale used in the included studies was the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Of the 13 adjunctive agents identified, aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, edivoxetine, and risperidone improved functioning versus placebo (p<0.05), as measured by the SDS total or mean score. On the SDS "work/studies" item, only aripiprazole had a statistically significant benefit, in one study out of four. Thus, where a benefit was observed on the SDS total or mean, this was generally driven by improvement on the "social life" and "family life" items. A limitation of the review is that it only considered published literature from one database. CONCLUSION: The SDS, a self-rated functional measure, is informative in acute randomized placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT. However, the item that measures work performance may be less relevant to this population than the items that measure social and family life.

Are clear boundaries a prerequisite for well-functioning collaboration in home health care? A mixed methods study.

AIM: The aim of this study was to examine whether professional collaboration in home health care is associated with clear boundaries between principals' areas of responsibility and the professions areas of responsibility, respectively. METHODS: Data were derived from a web-based survey that was carried out in one county in the middle of Sweden during spring 2013. Participants were health professionals and managers from the county council and from all the municipalities in the county. Both structured and open-ended questions were utilised. A total of 421 individuals (90% women) answered the structured questions, and 91 individuals (22% of the 421) answered the open-ended questions. Quantitative data were analysed with descriptive statistics methods, tests of independence and of correlation strength. Qualitative data were analysed with content analysis. RESULTS: The results from the structured questions showed that well-functioning collaboration was associated with clear boundaries between principals in the county overall, and for respondents in two of three parts of the county. Association between clear boundaries between professions and well-functioning collaboration was found in the county overall among the municipality population. However, in one part of the county, we did not find any correlations between well-functioning collaboration and clear boundaries between professions or principals, with the exception of home help services. The analysis of the open questions gave similar results as the quantitative analysis, illustrated within three themes: The significance of concepts, trust and interdependence, and collaboration as a means for well-being. CONCLUSION: The results indicate that, recently after an organisational change, clear boundaries between the principals' areas of responsibility and professions' area of responsibility respectively are necessary for effective cooperation between professionals. If the organisation and professionals have previous positive experience of colocated activities, clear boundaries do not share the same importance.

Economic stress and condescending treatment in childhood and adult self-rated health: results from a population study in Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Even today, 12% of the children in Sweden live in poverty and many children are exposed to adverse experiences, such as being bullied, which may have long-term consequences on public health. This study examined the associations between economic stress and condescending treatment in childhood and self-rated health (SRH) in adulthood. METHODS: The study is based on 26,706 persons who responded to a postal survey questionnaire sent to a random sample of men and women aged 25-84 years in 2012 (response rate 53%). The associations between childhood circumstances and adult SRH were analysed by logistic regression, adjusting for sex, age, economic stress in adulthood, condescending treatment in adulthood, socioeconomic status and several other known material, behavioural and psychosocial risk factors. RESULTS: In total, 39% of both men and women reported economic stress in their family during childhood. 36% of the men and 41% of the women indicated that they had been treated in a condescending manner, e.g. in school or at home, during childhood. Both economic stress in childhood and condescending treatment in childhood were strongly associated with adult SRH. The associations attenuated, but were still statistically significant after adjustment for adulthood circumstances and other risk factors. CONCLUSION: Economic stress in childhood and condescending treatment in childhood were associated with SRH in adulthood, both independently and through adulthood circumstances. The results underline the importance of taking into account both material and psychosocial circumstances over the whole life course when developing public health measures.

Assessing the Reliability and Validity of the Sheehan Irritability Scale in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Irritability is a significant component in the clinical manifestation of major depressive disorder (MDD). The Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) was developed to assess irritability-related symptoms in patients with psychiatric disorders. Data from a phase 2 clinical trial (June 2008-July 2009) was utilized to evaluate the psychometric properties of the SIS. The trial population included patients diagnosed with MDD, according to DSM-IV and confirmed via the MINI diagnostic scale, who had inadequate response to citalopram. METHOD: The secondary analyses included 586 patients from the United States and India. Data from the SIS, depression severity measures (17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale [HDRS-17], Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS], Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report [QIDS-SR]), and other measures (Sheehan Disability Scale [SDS], Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale [CGI-S]) were used in the psychometric evaluation. All statistical tests used a significance level of .05 unless otherwise noted. RESULTS: Internal consistency (0.92-0.99) and test-retest reliability (0.83 to 0.98) were excellent. Concurrent validity was demonstrated through strong correlations between the SIS total score and HDRS-17, QIDS-SR, SDS, CGI-S, and MADRS scores. SIS total scores were significantly different by clinical severity level (P < .001). Minimally important difference estimates suggest that a 7- to 8-point change in the SIS total score may be clinically meaningful. CONCLUSIONS: The SIS has excellent reliability, acceptable validity, and good responsiveness, making the SIS appropriate for use in clinical research and practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00692445.

Content validity of the Sheehan Irritability Scale in patients with major depressive disorder.

The Sheehan Irritability Scale (SIS) measures the frequency, severity, and impairment associated with irritability in psychiatric patients. The content validity of the SIS in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) has not been evaluated. A cross-sectional, qualitative research study was conducted to assess the content validity of the SIS among patients with MDD. One-on-one interviews were conducted, starting with open-ended questions to evaluate the consistency of the SIS content with patient experiences of irritability. Participants then completed the SIS and cognitive interviews around the comprehension of the SIS content (instructions, items, response options). Participants included 24 patients diagnosed with MDD who had an inadequate response to an antidepressant treatment. The sample was: 50.4 mean years, 66.7% female, and 91.7% white racial background. All concepts on the SIS were spontaneously mentioned by at least one participant, and when probed about the symptoms, the majority of participants (66.7-100%) reported the concepts being part of their experience. The majority of participants (70.8-100%) understood the SIS instructions, items, and response scales. This study provides evidence of content validity of the SIS in patients diagnosed with MDD, supporting the use as a measure of irritability in patients with depression.

Efficacy and safety of adjunctive brexpiprazole 2 mg in major depressive disorder: a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with inadequate response to antidepressants.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of brexpiprazole as adjunctive therapy to antidepressant treatments (ADTs) in adults with major depressive disorder (as defined by DSM-IV-TR criteria) and inadequate response to ADTs. METHOD: Patients with historical inadequate response to 1-3 ADTs were enrolled. All patients entered a prospective 8-week phase on physician-determined, open-label ADT. Those with inadequate response were randomized to ADT + brexpiprazole 2 mg/d or ADT + placebo for 6 weeks. The study was conducted between July 2011 and May 2013. The primary efficacy end point was change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. The key secondary end point was change from baseline to week 6 in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) mean score. The efficacy population comprised all patients who had ≥ 1 dose of study drug in the double-blind phase and both baseline and ≥ 1 postrandomization MADRS scores. The efficacy population per final protocol included patients from the efficacy population who met amended randomization criteria of inadequate response throughout prospective treatment. RESULTS: Brexpiprazole (n = 175) reduced mean MADRS total score versus placebo (n = 178) at week 6 in the efficacy population per final protocol (-8.36 vs -5.15, P = .0002). Brexpiprazole improved SDS mean score versus placebo (-1.35 vs -0.89, P = .0349). The most common treatment-related adverse events were weight gain (brexpiprazole, 8.0%; placebo, 3.1%) and akathisia (7.4% vs 1.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive brexpiprazole therapy demonstrated efficacy and was well tolerated in patients with major depressive disorder and inadequate response to ADTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01360645.

Adjunctive brexpiprazole 1 and 3 mg for patients with major depressive disorder following inadequate response to antidepressants: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole adjunctive to antidepressant treatments (ADTs) in patients with major depressive disorder (as defined by DSM-IV-TR criteria) with inadequate response to ADTs. METHOD: Patients still depressed despite 1-3 prior ADTs followed by 8 weeks of prospective physician-determined, open-label ADT were randomized (1:1:1) to double-blind brexpiprazole 3 mg/d, brexpiprazole 1 mg/d, or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to week 6. The key secondary efficacy end point was change in Sheehan Disability Scale mean score. The Hochberg procedure corrected for multiplicity. The efficacy population comprised all patients who had ≥ 1 dose of study drug with baseline and ≥ 1 postrandomization MADRS scores; the efficacy population per final protocol consisted of efficacy population patients meeting amended criteria for inadequate response throughout the 8-week prospective ADT. The study was conducted between June 2011 and September 2013. RESULTS: In the efficacy population per final protocol, brexpiprazole 3 mg (n = 213) showed a greater improvement in MADRS total score versus placebo (n = 203; -8.29 vs -6.33; P = .0079), whereas brexpiprazole 1 mg did not (n = 211; -7.64 vs -6.33; P = .0737). The brexpiprazole groups showed comparable improvement in SDS mean score versus placebo (least squares [LS] mean difference: [1 mg] -0.49, P = .0158; [3 mg] -0.48, P = .0191). The most frequent adverse events were akathisia (4.4%, 13.5%, 2.3%), headache (9.3%, 6.1%, 7.7%), and weight increase (6.6%, 5.7%, 0.9%) in brexpiprazole 1-mg, 3-mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Mean changes from baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (LS mean difference = 0.08, P = .0141) and Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (LS mean difference = 0.17, P = .0001) total scores were significantly greater with brexpiprazole 3 mg versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Brexpiprazole 3 mg demonstrated efficacy versus placebo in the efficacy population per final protocol. Both doses of brexpiprazole were well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01360632.

Efficacy and Safety of Brexpiprazole for the Treatment of Acute Schizophrenia: A 6-Week Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole and placebo were compared in adults with acute schizophrenia. METHOD: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients with schizophrenia experiencing an acute exacerbation were randomly assigned to daily brexpiprazole at a dosage of 0.25, 2, or 4 mg or placebo (1:2:2:2) for 6 weeks. Outcomes included change from baseline to week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (primary endpoint measure), Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI) severity score (key secondary endpoint measure), and other efficacy and tolerability measures. RESULTS: The baseline overall mean PANSS total score was 95.2, and the CGI severity score was 4.9. Study completion rates were 62.2%, 68.1%, and 67.2% for patients in the 0.25-, 2-, and 4-mg brexpiprazole groups, respectively, versus 59.2% in the placebo group. At week 6, compared with placebo, brexpiprazole dosages of 2 and 4 mg produced statistically significantly greater reductions in PANSS total score (treatment differences: -8.72 and -7.64, respectively) and CGI severity score (treatment differences: -0.33 and -0.38). The most common treatment-emergent adverse event for brexpiprazole was akathisia (2 mg: 4.4%; 4 mg: 7.2%; placebo: 2.2%). Weight gain with brexpiprazole was moderate (1.45 and 1.28 kg for 2 and 4 mg, respectively, versus 0.42 kg for placebo at week 6). There were no clinically or statistically significant changes from baseline in lipid and glucose levels and extrapyramidal symptom ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Brexpiprazole at dosages of 2 and 4 mg/day demonstrated statistically significant efficacy compared with placebo and good tolerability for patients with an acute schizophrenia exacerbation.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled phase 3 trial of fixed-dose brexpiprazole for the treatment of adults with acute schizophrenia.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of brexpiprazole versus placebo in adults with acute schizophrenia. This was a 6-week, multicenter, placebo-controlled double-blind phase 3 study. Patients with acute schizophrenia were randomized to brexpiprazole 1, 2 or 4 mg, or placebo (2:3:3:3) once daily. The primary endpoint was changed from baseline at week 6 in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score; the key secondary endpoint was Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) at week 6. Brexpiprazole 4 mg showed statistically significant improvement versus placebo (treatment difference: -6.47, p=0.0022) for the primary endpoint. Improvement compared with placebo was also seen for the key secondary endpoint (treatment difference: -0.38, p=0.0015), and on multiple secondary efficacy outcomes. Brexpiprazole 1 and 2mg also showed numerical improvements versus placebo, although p>0.05. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, insomnia and agitation; incidences of akathisia were lower in the brexpiprazole treatment groups (4.2%-6.5%) versus placebo (7.1%). Brexpiprazole treatment was associated with moderate weight gain at week 6 (1.23-1.89 kg versus 0.35 kg for placebo); there were no clinically relevant changes in laboratory parameters and vital signs. In conclusion, brexpiprazole 4 mg is an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment for acute schizophrenia in adults. Clinical Trials.gov NCT01393613; BEACON trial.

Two Phase III randomised double-blind studies of fixed-dose TC-5214 (dexmecamylamine) adjunct to ongoing antidepressant therapy in patients with major depressive disorder and an inadequate response to prior antidepressant therapy.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the neuronal nicotinic channel modulator TC-5214 (dexmecamylamine) as adjunct therapy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to prior antidepressant treatment. METHODS: Study 004 (D4130C00004) and Study 005 (D4130C00005) comprised an 8-week open-label antidepressant (SSRI/SNRI) treatment period followed by an 8-week randomised, active treatment with twice-daily TC-5214 (0.5, 2 or 4 mg in Study 004; 0.1, 1 or 4 mg in Study 005) or placebo, adjunct to ongoing SSRI/SNRI. Primary efficacy endpoint was change in MADRS total score from randomisation (Week 8) to treatment end (Week 16). Secondary endpoints included MADRS response and remission, and changes in SDS and HAM-D-17-item scores. Safety and tolerability were monitored throughout. RESULTS: Studies 004 and 005 randomised 640 and 696 patients, respectively, to TC-5214 or placebo. No statistically significant improvements in MADRS total score or any secondary endpoints were seen with TC-5214 versus placebo in either study at treatment end. The most commonly reported adverse events (> 10%) with TC-5214 were constipation, dizziness and dry mouth. CONCLUSIONS: TC-5214 adjunct to antidepressant was generally well tolerated. However, the studies were not supportive of an antidepressant effect for TC-5214 in patients with MDD and inadequate response to prior antidepressant therapy.

Smart Program Design Through a Common Information Model.

Although much information is already available publically from information-sharing initiatives such as ClinicalTrials.gov, information about clinical programs is unstructured, inconsistent, and incomplete. Clinical research within bioscience companies, health care, academia, and governmental agencies could benefit from easier access to best practices, historical information, and improved information sharing. Facilitating information sharing requires a standardized information model. Information standards today focus on individual clinical trials and the representation of clinical trial data. Although work is ongoing to expand standards to cover the protocol, these are insufficient to capture the objectives, rationale, and design thinking behind clinical programs. An information model is proposed to cover the rationalization and decision-making aspects of designing a clinical program and its associated trials. This paper is the output of a newly formed multicompany working group that examines the merits of a clinical program-level information standard. An example information model is presented to explain the concept.