Safety and Pharmacokinetics Following Oral or Intravenous Lefamulin in Adults With Cystic Fibrosis.

PURPOSE: Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus infections are increasing in prevalence in patients with cystic fibrosis (CF) and are associated with worsening lung function and increased mortality. Lefamulin is a pleuromutilin antimicrobial approved to treat community-acquired bacterial pneumonia based on potent in vitro activity and clinical efficacy. This Phase I, open-label, randomized crossover study assessed the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of oral and intravenous (IV) lefamulin in adults with CF. METHODS: The study comprised 2 dosing periods in which adults with CF (N = 13) received a single dose of lefamulin via a 150-mg IV infusion or 600-mg immediate-release orally administered tablet, separated by a 4- to 7-day washout period. Pharmacokinetic and safety parameters were assessed after lefamulin treatment. FINDINGS: Single doses of lefamulin administered via oral tablet or IV infusion resulted in comparable drug exposure, and sputum analysis suggested rapid penetration of lefamulin into the lung. Comparison of the present results with those obtained from prior single-dose studies of healthy volunteers indicate no meaningful difference in the pharmacokinetic properties of lefamulin in patients with CF. Treatment-emergent adverse events were consistent with previous reports, and the majority were mild in severity. IMPLICATIONS: These results show similar lefamulin pharmacokinetic and safety profiles between patients with CF and healthy volunteers receiving the same oral and IV doses, suggesting no need for lefamulin dose adjustment in patients with CF and indicating the potential of lefamulin as therapy for lung infections in patients with CF. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT05225805.

The effect of desvenlafaxine on cognitive functioning in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder: a substudy of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

The objective of this substudy was to examine the effect of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day compared with placebo on cognitive function in employed outpatients with major depressive disorder. A total of 11/55 (20%) study sites in a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial administered cognitive assessments in memory, attention, and executive functioning domains using the cognitive drug research system. Changes from baseline were subjected to analysis of covariance with baseline levels as covariates, using last observation carried forward data. A significant improvement with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day (n=52) compared with placebo (n=29) was observed on the quality of working memory composite measure (0.081 units (0.005, 0.156); P=0.0365) at last observation carried forward. Improvement from baseline on the speed of working memory composite was significant for desvenlafaxine (-226.6 msec (-316.7, -136.4); P<0.0001) and for placebo (-133.3 msec (-257.2, -9.4); P=0.0354); however, the treatment effect was not significant. No significant differences between groups were observed on composite measures for attention. Treatment of depression with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day may improve aspects of cognitive functioning, including working memory.Clinical Trial Registry No.: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00824291.

A Post Hoc Analysis of the Effect of Weight on Efficacy in Depressed Patients Treated With Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d and 100 mg/d.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of baseline body mass index (BMI) on efficacy and weight change in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with desvenlafaxine or placebo in a pooled, post hoc analysis. METHOD: Adults with MDD were randomly assigned to placebo or desvenlafaxine (50 mg or 100 mg) in 8 short-term, double-blind studies and 1 longer-term randomized withdrawal study (the studies were published between 2007 and 2013). Change from baseline in 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) total score at week 8 was analyzed in normal (BMI ≤ 25 kg/m(2)), overweight (25 kg/m(2) < BMI ≤ 30 kg/m(2)), and obese (BMI > 30 kg/m(2)) subgroups using analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Weight change was analyzed in BMI subgroups using ANCOVA and a mixed-effects model for repeated measures. RESULTS: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or 100 mg/d improved HDRS-17 scores significantly from baseline to week 8 (last observation carried forward) versus placebo in all BMI subgroups (normal: n = 1,122; overweight: n = 960; obese: n = 1,302; all P ≤ .0027); improvement was greatest in normal BMI patients. There was a statistically significant decrease in weight (< 1 kg) with short-term desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d and 100 mg/d versus placebo in all BMI subgroups (all P < .0001). In the randomized withdrawal study (n = 548), no statistically significant difference in weight was observed for desvenlafaxine versus placebo in any BMI subgroup. Baseline BMI predicted weight change in short-term and longer-term desvenlafaxine treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine significantly improved symptoms of depression versus placebo regardless of baseline BMI. In all BMI subgroups, desvenlafaxine was associated with statistically significant weight loss (< 1 kg) versus placebo over 8 weeks, but no significant differences longer term. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00072774, NCT00277823, NCT00300378, NCT00384033, NCT00798707, NCT00863798, NCT01121484, NCT00824291, NCT00887224.

An Analysis of Relapse Rates and Predictors of Relapse in 2 Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Trials of Desvenlafaxine for Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate relapse rates and predictors of relapse in 2 randomized, placebo-controlled trials of desvenlafaxine for major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Study 1: week 8 responders to open-label desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d entered a 12-week open-label stability phase. Patients with a continuing, stable response at week 20 were randomly assigned to 6-month, double-blind treatment (desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or placebo). Study 1 was conducted between June 2009 and March 2011 at 87 sites worldwide. Study 2: week 12 responders to open-label desvenlafaxine 200 or 400 mg/d were randomly assigned to 6-month, double-blind treatment (desvenlafaxine 200 mg/d, 400 mg/d, or placebo). Study 2 was conducted between June 2003 and August 2005 at 49 sites in Europe, the United States, and Taiwan. Relapse was assessed separately by study with log-rank test using protocol definitions of relapse and with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS-17) score ≥ 16 at any time during the double-blind phase. Kaplan-Meier estimates evaluated time to relapse, censoring data at months 1, 2, and 3 and overall; treatments were compared using hazard ratios. Cox proportional hazards models assessed relapse predictors. RESULTS: Overall relapse rates for all definitions were significantly lower for desvenlafaxine versus placebo for both studies (all P ≤ .002). In study 1, rates were significantly lower for desvenlafaxine versus placebo at month 2 (P = .016) and month 3 (P = .007) using the protocol definition. In study 2, relapse rates were significantly lower for desvenlafaxine versus placebo at months 1, 2, and 3 for both definitions (P < .0001-.002). Hazard ratios were similar at months 1, 2, and 3 and overall for both studies (0.382-0.639). CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine 50 to 400 mg/d effectively prevented relapse at 6 months. Desvenlafaxine significantly prevented relapse early (month 1) versus placebo only in study 2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers:NCT00887224 and NCT00075257.

Incidence and Timing of Taper/Posttherapy-Emergent Adverse Events Following Discontinuation of Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the incidence and timing of taper/posttherapy-emergent adverse events (TPAEs) following discontinuation of long-term treatment with desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate). METHOD: This was a phase 4, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study conducted at 38 research centers within the United States between March 2010 and February 2011. Adult outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD; DSM-IV-TR criteria) who completed 24 weeks of open-label treatment with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 groups for the double-blind taper phase: desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d for 4 weeks (no discontinuation), desvenlafaxine 25 mg/d for 1 week followed by placebo for 3 weeks (taper), or placebo for 4 weeks (abrupt discontinuation). The primary endpoint, Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms Scale (DESS) score over the first 2 weeks of the taper phase, was described previously. Secondary assessments included incidence and timing of TPAEs (any adverse event that started or increased in severity during the double-blind phase) and the percentage of patients who could not continue the taper phase due to discontinuation symptoms. The Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR16) assessed MDD status. RESULTS: A total of 480 patients enrolled in the open-label phase; the full analysis set included 357 patients (taper, n = 139; abrupt discontinuation, n = 146; no discontinuation, n = 72). TPAEs occurred in all groups through week 4. The incidence of any TPAE was lower for taper versus abrupt discontinuation at week 1 (P < .001), similar at week 2, and lower for taper versus abrupt discontinuation at weeks 3 and 4 (P ≤ .034). The most common TPAEs (incidence ≥ 3%) in the taper group were nausea and headache (3% each) at week 1 and dizziness (5%) and headache (4%) at week 2. The most common TPAEs in the abrupt discontinuation group were dizziness (8%), headache (8%), nausea (4%), irritability (3%), and diarrhea (3%) at week 1 and headache (3%) at weeks 2 and 3. The most common TPAE in the no discontinuation group was nausea (6%) at week 2. CONCLUSION: The overall incidence of any TPAE was lower in the taper versus abrupt discontinuation groups. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01056289.

A pooled analysis of the efficacy of desvenlafaxine for the treatment of major depressive disorder in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women.

BACKGROUND: Few studies in the literature have examined the efficacy of antidepressant drugs in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. The objective of the current study was to assess the efficacy of desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) separately in perimenopausal and postmenopausal women with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Data were pooled from two double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials enrolling perimenopausal and postmenopausal women (40-70 years old) diagnosed with MDD. Patients were randomly assigned to receive desvenlafaxine 100 to 200 mg/day or placebo (8 weeks) or desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day or placebo (10 weeks). The primary efficacy end point for each trial was change from baseline in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) total score at week 8. Secondary end points included change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and Menopause Rating Scale (MRS) scores. Changes from baseline in continuous variables were analyzed using analysis of covariance with treatment, region, and baseline in the model. All treatment comparisons were carried out separately in perimenopausal or postmenopausal women, in individual studies, and in the pooled population, adjusting for menopausal status and study. RESULTS: A total of 798 patients were included in the full analysis set (perimenopausal, n=252; postmenopausal, n=546). Desvenlafaxine significantly reduced HAM-D17 total scores versus placebo at week 8 in both perimenopausal (-10.3 vs. -6.5; p<0.001) and postmenopausal women (-10.1 vs. -7.6; p<0.001). Significant improvements in SDS and MRS total scores were also observed for desvenlafaxine versus placebo in perimenopausal (p ≤ 0.024) and postmenopausal women (p ≤ 0.009). A significant treatment by menopausal status interaction was observed for SDS only (p=0.036). CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine demonstrated antidepressant efficacy in both perimenopausal and postmenopausal subgroups of women with MDD. DISCLAIMER: In September 2011, Pfizer received a Complete Response Letter from the United States Food and Drug Administration on its application for approval to market desvenlafaxine for the treatment of moderate to severe vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause. The Complete Response Letter states that the data included in the application are not sufficient to establish an acceptable risk/benefit profile for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms in the general population of postmenopausal women, and therefore desvenlafaxine is not approved for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms in the United States at this time. This decision does not impact desvenlafaxine's approval for the treatment of MDD in adults.

Effects of desvenlafaxine on blood pressure in patients treated for major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of the serotonin-norepinephrine re-uptake inhibitor desvenlafaxine on blood pressure and incidence of new onset hypertension in pooled short-term studies and in two longer-term, randomized withdrawal studies. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data from patients randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine 10 mg to 400 mg/day or placebo in 11 short-term (8-12 weeks), fixed-dose, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of major depressive disorder (MDD) were pooled for analysis; two desvenlafaxine randomized withdrawal studies (36 and 46 weeks) were analyzed separately. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov , NCT00072774, NCT00073762, NCT00277823, NCT00300378, NCT00384033, NCT00798707, NCT00863798, NCT01121484, NCT00824291, NCT01432457, NCT00075257, NCT00887224. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Outcomes included change from baseline in supine systolic blood pressure (SSBP) and supine diastolic blood pressure (SDBP), assessed using a mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis, and incidence of hypertension (defined as three consecutive second SDBP measures ≥90 mm Hg AND increase of ≥10 mm Hg from baseline and/or SSBP ≥140 mm Hg AND increase of ≥10 mm Hg), analyzed using Cochran Mantel Hanzael tests. Potential predictors of change in SSBP and SDBP at LOCF were examined by including predictor variables in a regression model. RESULTS: In the pooled, short-term studies, mean changes from baseline over time in SSBP and SDBP were statistically significant compared with placebo for the desvenlafaxine doses of 10 mg/day or greater for SSBP (p ≤ 0.0004; MMRM) and 25 mg/day or greater for SDBP (p ≤ 0.0449; MMRM). The proportion of patients with new onset hypertension differed significantly from placebo for the 50, 200, and 400 mg/day doses (1.9%, 2.4%, 4.8%, respectively, vs 0.8%; all p ≤ 0.0244). Predictors of change in BP included baseline SDBP, baseline SSBP, dose, body mass index, gender, age, race, and history of hypertension. LIMITATIONS: Data were pooled from studies which differed somewhat in study design and patient demographics. None of the studies were originally designed to examine treatment effects on BP. Study entry criteria limit generalization of these results to medically stable patients with a primary diagnosis of MDD. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term desvenlafaxine treatment was associated with small but statistically significant increases in SSBP and SDBP.

The effect of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day on a subpopulation of anxious/depressed patients: a pooled analysis of seven randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

BACKGROUND: Desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) for anxious depression was assessed in a post hoc analysis. METHODS: Data were pooled from patients randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day or placebo in seven double-blind, fixed-dose studies in adults with major depressive disorder. Patients with "anxious depression" had baseline 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, anxiety-somatization factor (HAM-D17 A/S) scores ≥7. Primary end point was change in HAM-D17 scores from baseline at week 8 (last observation carried forward), evaluated using analysis of covariance with treatment, study, and baseline value as covariates. RESULTS: A total of 1873/2706 (69%) patients were identified as "anxious depressed". Desvenlafaxine significantly improved HAM-D17 total scores versus placebo in anxious (adjusted mean [95% CI] -1.72 [-2.35, -1.09]; p < 0.001) and nonanxious (-1.48 [-2.40, -0.57]; p = 0.002) populations, with no significant treatment-by-anxiety interaction. Response and remission rates (HAM-D17 ) were significantly higher with desvenlafaxine compared with placebo in both populations. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 78% and 69% (desvenlafaxine versus placebo, respectively) of anxious depressed patients and by 77% and 68% of nonanxious patients. CONCLUSION: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day significantly improved depressive symptoms compared with placebo in major depressive disorder patients with clinically relevant anxiety symptoms. Improvement in the HAM-D17 total score was similar for anxious/nonanxious groups.

Improvements in quality of life with desvenlafaxine 50mg/d vs placebo in employed adults with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Diminished quality of life (QOL) is associated with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: QOL was assessed in a post-hoc analysis of a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Employed adult outpatients with MDD were randomly assigned to 12 weeks of treatment with desvenlafaxine 50mg/d or placebo. Changes from baseline in the Short Form of the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) item scores at week 12 were analyzed using analysis of covariance with treatment, region, and baseline in the model. Correlations between change from baseline in the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) total score and Q-LES-Q scores were computed. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population included 427 patients. There were statistically significant improvements from baseline for desvenlafaxine vs placebo in 10 of 16 Q-LES-Q item scores (P values ≤0.0441). The percentage of patients with severe QOL impairment (≥2 SD below community norm) at week 12 was significantly lower for desvenlafaxine (46%) vs placebo (62%; P=0.0024; baseline: 95% and 94%, respectively). Change in Q-LES-Q total score was highly correlated with change in HAM-D17 score at week 12, LOCF (P<0.0001), and improvement in HAM-D17 total score at week 2 predicted change in Q-LES-Q total score at week 12 for the desvenlafaxine group (F=24.89; P<0.0001) but not placebo. LIMITATIONS: This analysis excluded patients who were unemployed, had severe comorbidities, and those taking multiple, concomitant medications. CONCLUSION: Improvement in QOL and depressive symptoms was significantly greater for employed depressed patients treated with desvenlafaxine vs placebo.

Predictors of functional response and remission with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d in patients with major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: The predictive value of early functional improvement for treatment success at week 8 was assessed in a pooled analysis in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Data were pooled from 7 double-blind studies in adult patients with MDD randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or placebo. Four levels of treatment success were determined at week 8 for patients with baseline Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score > 12 (N = 2156): functional response (SDS ≤12 and ≥50% improvement in SDS), functional/depression response (SDS ≤12 and ≥50% improvement in both SDS and 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D17] score), functional remission (SDS < 7), and functional/depression remission (SDS < 7 and HAM-D17 ≤7). Week 2 improvement in SDS was evaluated as a predictor of later functional response/remission using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Odds ratios (ORs) of the predictability of improvement thresholds were computed from a logistic regression model. RESULTS: The proportion of patients achieving each level of treatment success was significantly greater for patients treated with desvenlafaxine (40%, 32%, 23%, 15%, respectively) vs placebo (31%, 22%, 17%, 10%; all P ≤ 0.002). Early change in SDS was a highly significant predictor of functional response/remission (ORs, 0.958-0.970; all P < 0.0001). Discussion Patients' early functional response to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d is predictive of treatment success.

Real-world disparities between patient- and clinician-reported outcomes: results from a disease-specific program in depression and anxiety.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify potential discordance between physician and patient rated measures of depression used by primary care physicians and psychiatrists. PRIMARY PRACTICE SETTING: This study collected data from primary care physicians and psychiatrists in the United States between October and December 2009. METHODOLOGY AND SAMPLE: A real-world, cross-sectional study was conducted using the Neuroses Disease-Specific Programme (Adelphi Real World, Macclesfield, United Kingdom). Treatment practice data were collected by 180 physicians (100 primary care and 80 psychiatrists) who were asked to provide information for the next 15 outpatients presenting prospectively with symptoms of anxiety and/or depression (n = 2,704 patients). The primary outcome measures were the Clinical Global Impressions-and Patient Global Impressions-Improvement scales, completed by both physicians and their matched patients, respectively. Cohen's kappa coefficient (κ) was calculated to assess the level of agreement between the Clinical Global Impressions-and Patient Global Impressions-Improvement scale responses. RESULTS: Physician- and patient-rated overall improvement in illness was 82% and 89%, respectively. Results of the kappa analysis demonstrated fair agreement between patients and physicians regarding overall improvement in illness (44% agreement; κ= 0.23). Physician ratings of patient improvement progressively decreased with increased severity of illness. IMPLICATIONS FOR CASE MANAGEMENT PRACTICE: These real-world data suggest that the degree of reduction in symptoms of anxiety and/or depression may be estimated differently by physicians when compared with their patients. Understanding the potential for disparities between physician- and patient-rated measures in reviewing patient care, particularly in patients with more severe depressive symptoms, can help ensure that treatment plans are aligned with patient needs.

Post hoc analysis of the efficacy and safety of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day in a randomized, placebo-controlled study of perimenopausal and postmenopausal women with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day for treating major depressive disorder in perimenopausal versus postmenopausal women enrolled in a 10-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHODS: Perimenopausal and postmenopausal women (40-70 y) diagnosed with major depressive disorder were randomly assigned to receive desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day or placebo. Changes from baseline in the primary efficacy variable (17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression [HAM-D17] score, week 8) and in other secondary efficacy variables (Sheehan Disability Scale and Menopause Rating Scale) were analyzed using analysis of covariance with treatment, region, and baseline in the model. Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale was analyzed with the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test. Response and remission rates were evaluated using logistic regression with treatment, region, and baseline HAM-D17 in the model. RESULTS: Of 426 women (desvenlafaxine, n = 216; placebo, n = 210) included in this analysis, 135 (32%) were perimenopausal and 291 (68%) were postmenopausal at baseline. In both subgroups, improvement from baseline in HAM-D17 scores was significantly greater for desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day than for placebo. Menopause status and time since menopause did not significantly affect HAM-D17 total score. The drug-placebo difference in Sheehan Disability Scale scores was significant in perimenopausal women (-9.3 vs. -5.1, P < 0.001) but not in postmenopausal women (-8.8 vs. -8.1). Menopause Rating Scale and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale scores were significantly improved with desvenlafaxine in postmenopausal women. CONCLUSIONS: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day is effective in treating depression in both perimenopausal and postmenopausal women. Placebo response on measures of functional impairment is lower in perimenopausal women than in postmenopausal women, resulting in a greater apparent treatment benefit with desvenlafaxine among perimenopausal women.

BDNF, interleukin-6, and salivary cortisol levels in depressed patients treated with desvenlafaxine.

BACKGROUND: Relationships between brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), interleukin (IL)-6, and salivary cortisol and both depression severity and treatment response were assessed in patients enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of desvenlafaxine 50mg/d for MDD. METHODS: Outpatients with MDD were randomly assigned to 12weeks of double-blind treatment with desvenlafaxine 50mg/d or placebo (2:1). Baseline severity was assessed using the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17); treatment response at week 12 was based on HAM-D17 total score and response and remission status. Saliva (cortisol) and blood (BDNF, IL-6) samples for biomarker assay were collected at baseline and week 12. Spearman correlations were calculated between the biomarkers at baseline, and between biomarkers and HAM-D17 total score at baseline. Logistic regression analyses were used to assess whether baseline biomarker levels predicted treatment response at week 12, with and without adjustment for baseline HAM-D17 score, treatment, and geographic region. Similarly, an analysis of covariance was used to assess whether baseline disease severity predicted biomarker change at week 12. RESULTS: A total of 427 patients who received ≥1 dose of study drug and had baseline and ≥1 on-therapy primary efficacy evaluations were included in the analysis. At baseline, there was a statistically significant although weak correlation between levels of IL-6 and BDNF (Spearman correlation coefficient [rs]=0.120; P=0.014), but no significant correlation between baseline biomarker levels and baseline HAM-D17 total score (absolute value of all rs, ≤0.061). Desvenlafaxine 50mg/d treatment significantly reduced HAM-D17 total score from baseline at week 12 compared with placebo (P=0.006), but the three potential biomarkers did not predict treatment effects. No significant correlations were observed between the change from baseline in any biomarker level and change in HAM-D17 total score at week 12, either overall, or in desvenlafaxine or placebo groups (absolute value of all rs, 0.003-0.196). Baseline levels of BDNF, IL-6, and salivary cortisol did not significantly predict response to treatment at week 12. Although median increase in BDNF was not significantly different between desvenlafaxine (13.7%) and placebo (5.7%) groups, the increase was significantly greater (33.4% vs 4.3%; P=0.003) in patients with more severe depression at baseline (HAM-D17>22) vs those with less severe depression (HAM-D17≤22). No similar findings were observed for IL-6 or salivary cortisol. DISCUSSION: Weak or no relationships were observed at baseline between the potential biomarkers or between biomarkers and disease severity. While baseline biomarker level did not predict treatment response, improvement in BDNF was significantly greater among patients who were more severely depressed at baseline.

Early improvement in depressive symptoms with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d as a predictor of treatment success in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis assessed the predictive value of improvement in depressive scores at early time points for treatment outcomes at week 8 in patients with major depressive disorder treated with desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d or placebo. METHODS: Pooled data from 6 double-blind, fixed-dose studies in adult patients with major depressive disorder. Patients were randomly assigned to desvenlafaxine or placebo. Primary end point was change in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) scores from baseline to week 8 (or last observation carried forward). Optimal thresholds of improvement (percent change from baseline HAM-D17) at weeks 2 and 3 for predicting 4 levels of treatment success (≥ 45%, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 65% decrease from baseline HAM-D17, HAM-D17 ≤ 7) at week 8 (last observation carried forward) were determined using receiver operating characteristic analysis. Odds ratios of the predictability of improvement thresholds were computed from a logistic regression model adjusting for significant baseline predictors. RESULTS: Desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d (n = 1207) had significantly greater rates of treatment success for each level of treatment success at 8 weeks compared with placebo (n = 1067). Optimal early improvement thresholds for weeks 2 (20%-30%) and 3 (28%-41%) were highly predictive of all 4 levels of treatment success after adjusting for significant baseline predictors (odds ratios, 0.951-0.960; all P < 0.0001). Negative predictive value of early improvement increased, and positive predictive value decreased, for increasingly stringent definitions of treatment success at week 8. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical observations of patients' early response to desvenlafaxine 50 mg/d may have clinical value in predicting treatment success and guiding patient management.

Efficacy of desvenlafaxine 50 mg compared with placebo in patients with moderate or severe major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of six randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies.

This study assessed the efficacy of desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day compared with placebo for treating moderate or severe major depressive disorder (MDD). Data were pooled from six double-blind, placebo-controlled, desvenlafaxine 50 mg/day fixed-dose studies in adults with MDD. The primary endpoint was improvement in 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) scores from baseline at week 8. HAM-D17 changes were evaluated in patients with moderate (18

Cytochrome P450 2D6 phenoconversion is common in patients being treated for depression: implications for personalized medicine.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the point prevalence of phenoconversion to cytochrome P450 2D6 (CYP2D6) poor metabolizer status in clinical practice. METHOD: This multicenter, open-label, single-visit naturalistic study was conducted from October 2008 to July 2009 in adult patients (≥ 18 years) who had been receiving venlafaxine extended-release (ER) (37.5-225 mg/d) treatment for up to 8 weeks. A 15-mL blood sample was drawn 4 to 12 hours after patients' last venlafaxine ER dose. Plasma O-desmethylvenlafaxine and venlafaxine concentrations were determined for each patient. CYP2D6 poor metabolizer phenotype was defined as O-desmethylvenlafaxine to venlafaxine ratio < 1 based on published data. CYP2D6 genotype was determined for each patient; patients were classified as poor metabolizer, intermediate metabolizer, extensive metabolizer, and ultrarapid metabolizer. Agreement between poor metabolizer phenotype and genotype classifications was assessed using the McNemar test. RESULTS: Phenoconversion to CYP2D6 poor metabolizer status occurred in 209 of 865 individuals (24%) with a CYP2D6 non-poor metabolizer genotype. The incidence of CYP2D6 poor metabolizer status based on phenotype was almost 7 times higher than that expected based on genotype: only 4% (35/900) of patients were genotypic CYP2D6 poor metabolizers, but 27% (243/900) were phenotypic CYP2D6 poor metabolizers (McNemar test, P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: CYP2D6 phenotype conversion is common in patients being treated for depression. These results are important because differences in CYP2D6 drug metabolic capacity, whether genetically determined or due to phenoconversion, can affect clinical outcomes in patients treated with drugs substantially metabolized by CYP2D6. These results demonstrate that personalized medicine based solely on genetics can be misleading and support the need to consider drug-induced variability as well. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials identifier: NCT00788944.

Maintenance of the efficacy of desvenlafaxine in menopausal vasomotor symptoms: a 1-year randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the 1-year maintenance of the efficacy of desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) established on week 12 in a 1-year, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial in postmenopausal women seeking treatment of bothersome vasomotor symptoms. METHODS: Primary efficacy endpoints were changes in hot flush (HF) frequency and severity on weeks 12, 26, and 52 in an efficacy substudy population (≥50 moderate and severe HFs per week at baseline). Secondary endpoints were Greene climacteric scale, patient global impression symptom rating, and patient global impression of change scores (weeks 12, 26, and 52) for the main study efficacy population. Safety was assessed throughout the trial. RESULTS: The mean baseline HF frequency (efficacy substudy population, n = 365) was 12 moderate and severe HFs per day; the mean baseline severity score was 2.4. At 1 year, women treated with desvenlafaxine maintained the efficacy established on week 12. Desvenlafaxine reduced HF frequency by 7.47 moderate and severe HFs per day on week 12 (adjusted mean difference from placebo, -2.48; 95% CI, -3.47 to -1.50; P < 0.001) and by 7.70 moderate and severe HFs per day on month 12 (adjusted mean difference from placebo, -2.86; 95% CI, -4.14 to -1.57; P < 0.001). Desvenlafaxine reduced the mean severity score by 0.63 on week 12 (placebo, -0.30; P < 0.001) and by 0.75 on month 12 (placebo, -0.44; P = 0.003). Reductions in Greene Climacteric Scale total score (main study efficacy population, n = 1,950) were significantly greater for desvenlafaxine than for placebo on months 3, 6, and 12 (all P < 0.001). Treatment-emergent adverse event rates were 84% for desvenlafaxine and 79% for placebo (P = 0.006). Full safety results are reported separately. CONCLUSIONS: The treatment efficacy of desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day achieved on week 12 in postmenopausal women with vasomotor symptoms is maintained for 1 year.

Cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, and hepatic safety of desvenlafaxine for 1 year in women with vasomotor symptoms associated with menopause.

OBJECTIVE: A previous trial of the serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) raised concerns on potential serious cardiovascular and hepatic events. The current study was designed to estimate these events in desvenlafaxine versus placebo in a larger population followed for 1 year. METHODS: Healthy postmenopausal women seeking treatment of vasomotor symptoms were randomized to placebo or desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day in a 1-year, multicenter, double-blind study. Safety was monitored throughout. Potential ischemic cardiovascular events (coronary heart disease-related death, new-onset myocardial infarction or unstable angina requiring hospitalization, and unscheduled revascularization procedures) and cerebrovascular events (definite stroke or probable stroke) identified by investigator reports and periodic adverse event review based on Standardized medical dictionary for regulatory activities Query were reviewed by blinded adjudication boards. Hepatic events (aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >5 times the upper limit of normal) were evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 2,118 participants (1,066 desvenlafaxine, 1,052 placebo) took one or more doses of study medication (mean, 280 d). There was one cardiovascular event; a placebo-treated participant was adjudicated to have had a myocardial infarction. One desvenlafaxine-treated participant was adjudicated to have had a probable stroke. Two participants in each treatment group had hepatic events. The excess risk (90% CI) of desvenlafaxine over placebo per 1,000 woman-years was -1.07 (-2.86 to 0.72) for cardiovascular events, 1.11 (-0.68 to 2.9) for cerebrovascular events, and 0.08 (-3.51 to 3.67) for hepatic events. CONCLUSIONS: There is no evidence for an increased risk of cardiovascular, cerebrovascular, or hepatic events associated with desvenlafaxine 100 mg/day compared with placebo for the treatment of menopausal vasomotor symptoms.

A meta-analysis of factors impacting detection of antidepressant efficacy in clinical trials: the importance of academic sites.

Variability in placebo response greatly complicates the design, conduct, and interpretation of clinical trials of antidepressant medications. To identify factors that impact detection of antidepressant-placebo differences, we conducted a meta-analysis of all relevant phase II-IV clinical trials for major depressive disorder conducted by the manufacturer of venlafaxine and desvenlafaxine completed by March 2011. We examined 15 factors potentially relevant to trial outcomes, using the standardized mean difference on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) score as the primary outcome. Thirty trials comprising 8933 patients were included. In univariate analyses, antidepressant efficacy (ie, drug vs placebo difference) was predicted most strongly (ß=3.74, p=0.0002) by the proportion of patients in the trial enrolled from academic sites. Other factors predicting larger drug-placebo differences included lower participant completion rate, fewer post-baseline study visits, earlier year of study, and study drug (venlafaxine>desvenlafaxine). In multivariate meta-regression modeling, only the proportion of patients from academic sites maintained statistical significance as a predictor of drug-placebo separation for both HAM-D17 continuous score change (ß=2.24, p=0.034) and response rate (ß=2.26, p=0.035). Including a higher proportion of academic sites may increase the ability to detect differences between active drug and placebo in clinical trials of major depressive disorder.

Assessing the relationship between functional impairment/recovery and depression severity: a pooled analysis.

The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between assessments of functional impairment, emotional well-being, and depression symptoms. Data were pooled from 3530 outpatients with major depressive disorder enrolled in 10 desvenlafaxine clinical trials. The primary outcome measures included (a) the 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17) as a measure of depressive symptom severity and (b) the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and five-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5) as measures of functional impairment and well-being. A linear regression model was used to identify the SDS and WHO-5 values that equate to the predetermined clinically relevant three-point difference between active treatment and placebo on the HAM-D17. A receiver operating characteristic analysis was conducted to determine the SDS score that equates to a remission of depression symptoms (i.e. HAM-D17≤7). An approximate three-point difference between active treatment and placebo on the SDS (2.8) and WHO-5 (2.5) was determined to be clinically relevant in relation to improvements in depressive symptoms. An SDS of less than or equal to 7 was equivalent to a remission of depression symptoms, providing a definition of functional remission. A better understanding of the relationship between depressive symptoms and functional impairment and well-being may provide clinicians with a more comprehensive means of assessing treatment effects in major depressive disorder.