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

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

Retinal Functional and Structural Changes in the 5xFAD Mouse Model of Alzheimer's Disease.

Alzheimer's disease is characterized by the aberrant deposition of protein in the brain and is the leading cause of dementia worldwide. Increasingly, there have been reports of the presence of these protein hallmarks in the retina. In this study, we assayed the retina of 5xFAD mice, a transgenic model of amyloid deposition known to exhibit dementia-like symptoms with age. Using OCT, we found that the retinal nerve fiber layer was thinner in 5xFAD at 6, 12, and 17 months of age compared with wild-type littermates, but the inner plexiform layer was thicker at 6 months old. Retinal function showed reduced ganglion cell responses to light in 5xFAD at 6, 12, and 17 months of age. This functional loss was observed in the outer retina at 17 months of age but not in younger mice. We showed using immunohistochemistry and ELISA that soluble and insoluble amyloid was present in the retina and brain at all ages. In conclusion, we report that amyloid is present in brain and retina of 5xFAD mice and that the pattern of neuronal dysfunction occurs in the inner retina at the early ages and progresses to encompass the outer retina with age. This implies that the inner retina is more sensitive to amyloid changes in early disease and that the outer retina is also affected with disease progression.

Clinically Negligible Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Interactions Between Lanabecestat and Dabigatran Etexilate, a Prototypical P-gp Substrate.

Lanabecestat, a novel ß-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 inhibitor evaluated for Alzheimer treatment, inhibits P-glycoprotein (P-gp) activity in vitro. After oral 50-mg lanabecestat administration, gastric fluid lanabecestat concentrations exceed half-maximal inhibitory concentration (IC50 ), suggesting P-gp inhibition at the intestinal wall. Plasma drug concentrations following 50 mg lanabecestat administered once daily are <10% of IC50 , suggesting minimal systemic P-gp interaction. Dabigatran etexilate (DE) is the prodrug of dabigatran, a thrombin inhibitor and P-gp substrate, making dabigatran exposure an intestinal P-gp activity indicator. This study (NCT02568397) was conducted in 60 healthy subjects receiving a single dose of 150 mg DE alone or during a lanabecestat treatment regimen. On day 16, lanabecestat and DE were coadministered; on day 20, DE was dosed 4 hours after lanabecestat. Safety was assessed using clinical labs, electrocardiogram, vital signs, Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale scores, adverse events, and eye and skin examinations. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic samples were collected up to 36 hours postdose. Geometric mean plasma dabigatran area under the curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞ ) and the maximum plasma drug concentration (Cmax ) increased by 15% and 17%, respectively, when coadministered with lanabecestat. When DE was dosed 4 hours after lanabecestat, there was no effect on plasma dabigatran AUC0-∞ , Cmax , or thrombin time. DE had no effect on lanabecestat's AUC0-∞ and Cmax at steady state (day 16) versus lanabecestat alone (day 15). No clinically relevant safety concerns were observed. Lanabecestat has no clinically meaningful effect on dabigatran exposure or on P-gp activity at the intestinal wall.

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

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

Population Pharmacokinetic Modeling With Enterohepatic Circulation for AZD3241 in Healthy Subjects and Patients With Multiple System Atrophy.

AZD3241 is a potent and selective myeloperoxidase inhibitor potentially for the treatment of a number of neurodegenerative disorders, including multiple system atrophy (MSA). The objectives of this work were to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model for AZD3241 and to investigate the correlation between AZD3241 exposure and myeloperoxidase inhibition. The PopPK model was developed using AZD3241 data from one phase 1 study in healthy subjects and one phase 2 study in patients with MSA. A one-compartment model incorporating a gallbladder compartment for enterohepatic circulation, sequential zero-first order absorption, and first-order elimination adequately described the AZD3241 concentration profiles. The apparent clearance and central volume of distribution were 63.1 L/h (interindividual variability: 34.8%) and 121.9 L (interindividual variability: 44.0%), respectively. The enterohepatic circulation model reasonably captured the second peak of AZD3241, and high-fat food increased the absorption rate by 69%. A linear regression model was applied to describe the relationship between AZD3241 exposure and percentage change from baseline in myeloperoxidase-specific activity. The developed PopPK model was consistent with known pharmacokinetic characteristics of AZD3241. This model can be used to estimate AZD3241 exposure in patients with MSA and could be applied to future pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analyses of AZD3241 in clinical development.

Clinical Bioavailability of the Novel BACE1 Inhibitor Lanabecestat (AZD3293): Assessment of Tablet Formulations Versus an Oral Solution and the Impact of Gastric pH on Pharmacokinetics.

The relative bioavailability of lanabecestat administered as 2 tablet formulations versus an oral solution was investigated. This phase 1 single-center, open-label, randomized, 3-period crossover study involved healthy male and nonfertile female subjects aged 18-55 years (NCT02039180). Subjects received a single 50-mg lanabecestat dose as solution, tablet A, or tablet B on day 1 of each crossover period; 14 of 16 subjects completed the study. Relative bioavailability based on plasma lanabecestat AUC0-∞ (area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve from zero to infinity) geometric mean ratio versus oral solution (primary variable) was: tablet A, 1.052 (90% confidence interval [CI], 1.001-1.106); tablet B, 1.040 (0.989-1.093). These 90%CIs for geometric mean ratios are within accepted standard bioequivalence boundaries for all other pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters for both lanabecestat and metabolite (AZ13569724). All 3 formulations had similar plasma lanabecestat concentration-time profiles. Six adverse events were reported by 6 subjects (37.5%, all mild). GastroPlus modeling predicted a negligible impact of gastric pH changes on systemic PK (up to pH 7.4). Both tablet formulations fall within standard accepted bioequivalence criteria versus the oral solution. A single 50-mg lanabecestat dose was well tolerated as a solution or tablet formulation in this population.

The Eye As a Biomarker for Alzheimer's Disease.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a progressive neurodegenerative disorder resulting in dementia and eventual death. It is the leading cause of dementia and the number of cases are projected to rise in the next few decades. Pathological hallmarks of AD include the presence of hyperphosphorylated tau and amyloid protein deposition. Currently, these pathological biomarkers are detected either through cerebrospinal fluid analysis, brain imaging or post-mortem. Though effective, these methods are not widely available due to issues such as the difficulty in acquiring samples, lack of infrastructure or high cost. Given that the eye possesses clear optics and shares many neural and vascular similarities to the brain, it offers a direct window to cerebral pathology. These unique characteristics lend itself to being a relatively inexpensive biomarker for AD which carries the potential for wide implementation. The development of ocular biomarkers can have far implications in the discovery of treatments which can improve the quality of lives of patients. In this review, we consider the current evidence for ocular biomarkers in AD and explore potential future avenues of research in this area.

Quetiapine for the treatment of bipolar mania in older adults.

OBJECTIVES: A post hoc analysis of pooled data from two quetiapine monotherapy clinical trials was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine therapy (twice daily, 400-800 mg/day) among bipolar manic adults aged 55 years and older. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score at Day 21. A secondary endpoint was change from baseline in YMRS score at Day 84. METHODS: A total of 407 patients made up the safety population, consisting of 59 older adults (aged >or=55 years) and 348 younger adults. A total of 403 patients made up the efficacy population, consisting of 59 older adults and 344 younger adults. Efficacy outcomes were analyzed using covariance models (ANCOVA); descriptive statistics are presented for safety outcomes. RESULTS: Both older and younger individuals treated with quetiapine had significant improvement from baseline on YMRS scores compared with placebo-treated patients. The older adult group demonstrated a sustained reduction in YMRS score compared with placebo that was apparent by Day 4 of treatment. For the quetiapine treatment groups, the most common adverse effects (at a frequency >or=10%) were dry mouth, somnolence, postural hypotension, insomnia, weight gain, and dizziness in older adults, and dry mouth, somnolence, and insomnia in younger adults. For the placebo treatment groups, insomnia was the most common adverse event in both older and younger adults. CONCLUSIONS: This secondary analysis suggests that quetiapine represents a potentially useful treatment option among older adults with bipolar I mania. Studies with a primary focus of geriatric bipolar mania, and including larger patient numbers, are needed to confirm these findings.

Reporting outcomes in clinical trials for bipolar disorder: a commentary and suggestions for change.

OBJECTIVE: Newer outcome measures and statistical reporting that better translate efficacy data to evidence-based psychiatric care are needed when evaluating clinical trials for bipolar disorder. Using efficacy studies as illustrations, the authors review and recommend changes in the reporting of traditional clinical outcomes both in the acute and maintenance phases of bipolar disorder. METHODS: Definitions of response, remission, relapse, recovery, and recurrence are reviewed and recommendations for change are made. These suggestions include reporting the numbers needed to treat or harm (NNT or NNH), and a ratio of the two, likelihood of help or harm (LHH), as an important element of the effect size (ES). Moreover, models of prediction that conduct sensitivity or specificity analyses and utilize decision trees to help predict positive and negative outcomes of interest (for instance, excessive weight gain, or time to remission) using positive or negative predictive values (PPV or NPV) are reviewed for potential value to clinicians. Finally, functional and cognitive assessments are recommended for maintenance studies of bipolar disorder. RESULTS: The examples provided in this manuscript underscore that reporting the NNT or NNH, or alternative effect sizes, or using PPV or NPV may be of particular value to clinicians. Such reports are likely to help translate efficacy-driven clinical data to information that will more readily guide clinicians on the benefits and risks of specific interventions in bipolar disorder. CONCLUSIONS: The authors opine that reporting these newer outcomes, such as NNT or NNH, area under the receiver operating curve (AUC), or PPV or NPV will help translate the results of clinical trials into a language that is more readily understood by clinicians. Moreover, assessing and evaluating functional and cognitive outcomes will not only inform clinicians about potential differences among therapeutic options, but likely will make it easier to communicate such differences to persons with bipolar illness or to their families. Finally, we hope such scientific and research efforts will translate to optimism for recovery-based outcomes in persons with bipolar disorder.

Quetiapine in the treatment of acute mania: target dose for efficacious treatment.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the available evidence from randomized clinical trials regarding the effective dose range and optimal dose of quetiapine when treating bipolar I disorder patients with acute mania. METHODS: Patients with acute mania were treated with quetiapine as monotherapy (for 12 weeks) or in combination with lithium (mean serum concentration 0.76 mEq/L) or divalproex (mean serum concentration 69.5 microg/mL) (Li/DVP) (for 3-6 weeks) in four double-blind, placebo-controlled studies according to a predetermined dosing schedule. Guidance for the dosing of quetiapine involved increasing the first day's dose (100 mg/day) by 100 mg on a daily basis until Day 4 (400 mg/day), then adjusting the dose up to 600 mg/day at Day 5, and up to 800 mg/day thereafter. Pooled data from the two monotherapy studies and the two combination therapy studies have been used to evaluate the effective quetiapine dose range. As the dose was flexible, effective dose was estimated by the mean last-week dose among responders. The mean last-week dose was defined as the median dose during the 7 days before the last available Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) assessment. Patients who achieved a > or = 50% decrease in the YMRS total score from baseline to end of treatment with quetiapine were considered responders. Tolerability was assessed from direct patient reports. RESULTS: According to randomized clinical trials, administration of quetiapine compared with placebo achieved a statistically significant improvement in change from baseline YMRS score within the first week and onward, as monotherapy or in combination with Li/DVP. The average quetiapine dose (+/-SD) in responders during the last week of treatment was 575 (+/-175) at Day 21 and 598 (+/-198) mg/day at Day 84 for monotherapy, and 584+/-208 mg/day at Day 21 for combination therapy, with most responders receiving doses within the range of 400-800 mg/day. Dose escalation was rapid, with 92% of patients treated with monotherapy and 80% of patients treated with combination therapy reaching doses of 400 mg/day by Day 4, in accordance with protocol-defined dosing guidance. This dose administration schedule was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: The mean last-week median dose among responders suggests that 600 mg/day of quetiapine is an effective target dose in acute mania.

Rates of remission/euthymia with quetiapine in combination with lithium/divalproex for the treatment of acute mania.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to compare the rates of remission/euthymia in patients with bipolar mania receiving quetiapine in combination with lithium/divalproex (QTP+Li/DVP) versus placebo (PBO) in combination with Li/DVP (PBO+Li/DVP). METHODS: A pooled analysis of two (one 3-week and one 6-week) double-blind studies of a total of 370 patients hospitalized with bipolar I mania who received quetiapine (up to 800 mg/day) in combination with Li (mean serum concentration 0.76 mEq/L) or DVP (mean serum concentration 69.5 microg/mL) was performed. For both studies, data were analyzed at Day 21. In addition, for the 6-week study, data were analyzed at Day 42. Five different criteria for remission/euthymia were used: (i) Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score < or = 12; (ii) YMRS score < or = 12 plus a Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score < or = 10; (iii) YMRS score < or = 12+MADRS score < or = 8; (iv) YMRS score < or = 8; and (v) YMRS score < or = 8 plus a score < or = 2 for the YMRS core items of Irritability, Speech, Content, and Disruptive/Aggressive Behavior. RESULTS: In the pooled analysis, Day 21 remission rates (YMRS < or = 12) were significantly higher in patients treated with QTP+Li/DVP compared with those who received PBO+Li/DVP (48.7% versus 33.0%, p=0.003). Rates of remission/euthymia (YMRS < or = 12+MADRS < or = 10) were similarly improved with QTP+Li/DVP compared with Li/DVP alone (43.2% versus 26.5%, p=0.001). Using the most stringent criteria (YMRS < or = 12+MADRS < or = 8), rates of remission/euthymia were again significantly higher with QTP+Li/DVP than with Li/DVP alone (38.4% versus 25.9%, p=0.014). More patients treated with quetiapine met the stringent criterion of YMRS < or = 8 (31.9% versus 24.3%; p=NS). A trend in favor of quetiapine was also observed for the more stringent criterion of YMRS < or = 8 plus core items < or = 2 (28.1% versus 23.2%; p=NS). For the 6-week study, at Day 42, YMRS was < or = 12 in 68.3% of patients treated with QTP+Li/DVP compared with 57.3% of those who received PBO+Li/DVP (p=NS). Respective rates based on the remission criterion of YMRS < or = 8 were 36.5% and 32.3% (p=NS), and with YMRS < or = 8 and core items < or = 2 were 53.8% and 45.8% (p=NS). However, a significant difference was observed between patients treated with QTP+Li/DVP versus those treated with PBO+Li/DVP using criteria of YMRS < or = 12+MADRS < or = 10 (63.5% versus 49.0%, p<0.05) or YMRS < or = 12+MADRS < or = 8 (61.5% versus 46.9%, p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: At Days 21 and 42, quetiapine combined with Li/DVP compared to Li/DVP monotherapy yielded significant, sustained improvements in the rate of clinical remission/euthymia in patients with bipolar mania. Longer-term studies are warranted to assess whether quetiapine combined with other mood stabilizing medications can yield even longer-term resolution of symptoms of acute mania while concurrently preventing emergence of depressive symptoms.

Quetiapine or haloperidol as monotherapy for bipolar mania--a 12-week, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS: Patients (n=302) with bipolar I disorder (manic episode) were randomised to 12 weeks' double-blind treatment with quetiapine (flexibly dosed up to 800 mg/day), placebo, or haloperidol (up to 8 mg/day). The primary efficacy outcome variable was change from baseline to Day 21 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score. RESULTS: YMRS score improved with quetiapine at Day 21 (-12.29 versus -8.32 for placebo; P<0.01). The difference in favor of quetiapine increased by Day 84 (-17.52 versus -9.48; P<0.001). Haloperidol also showed an advantage over placebo at Days 21 and 84 (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in efficacy measures between quetiapine and haloperidol groups at any assessment except Day 21. The only common adverse event with quetiapine was somnolence (12.7%). Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), including akathisia, occurred at 59.6% with haloperidol, 12.7% with quetiapine, 15.8% with placebo. Most quetiapine responders (84%) received a dose of 400-800 mg/day. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine was effective and well tolerated. The efficacy and tolerability profile of haloperidol (including its propensity for EPS) supported study validity.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine in the treatment of bipolar I or II depression.

OBJECTIVE: There is a major unmet need for effective options in the treatment of bipolar depression. METHOD: Five hundred forty-two outpatients with bipolar I (N=360) or II (N=182) disorder experiencing a major depressive episode (DSM-IV) were randomly assigned to 8 weeks of quetiapine (600 or 300 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was mean change from baseline to week 8 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score. Additional efficacy assessments included the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impression of severity and improvement, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, and Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire. RESULTS: Quetiapine at either dose demonstrated statistically significant improvement in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total scores compared with placebo from week 1 onward. The proportions of patients meeting response criteria (> or =50% Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale score improvement) at the final assessment in the groups taking 600 and 300 mg/day of quetiapine were 58.2% and 57.6%, respectively, versus 36.1% for placebo. The proportions of patients meeting remission criteria (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale < or =12) were 52.9% in the groups taking 600 and 300 mg/day of quetiapine versus 28.4% for placebo. Quetiapine at 600 and 300 mg/day significantly improved 9 of 10 and 8 of 10 Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale items, respectively, compared to placebo, including the core symptoms of depression. Treatment-emergent mania rates were low and similar for the quetiapine and placebo groups (3.2% and 3.9%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine monotherapy is efficacious and well tolerated for the treatment of bipolar depression.

Quetiapine monotherapy for mania associated with bipolar disorder: combined analysis of two international, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of quetiapine monotherapy for mania in bipolar disorder by an a priori defined combined analysis of data from two placebo-controlled studies. METHOD: The intent-to-treat (ITT) populations from two studies of patients with DSM-IV bipolar I disorder, manic episode, randomised to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with quetiapine (up to 800 mg/day) or placebo were combined. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score from baseline to Day 21. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in YMRS to Day 84, YMRS response and remission rates and change from baseline to Days 21 and 84 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impressions (CGI), Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar (CGI-BP) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS). These endpoints were analysed as continuous variables, using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA), with the baseline as covariate. In order to account for any difference in response between studies, the analyses were stratified by study as a fixed effect, and centre as a random effect. The Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel test was used to analyse binary variables. A chi square test was used to compare the frequency of adverse events between the treatment groups. RESULTS: The combined analysis included a total of 403 patients from two quetiapine monotherapy studies in patients with bipolar I disorder. A significant improvement in YMRS score was observed from Day 4 (p = 0.021) onward in the quetiapine group compared with placebo. The treatment advantage of quetiapine over placebo continued to increase to Day 21 (p < 0.001) and Day 84 (p < 0.001). Significantly more quetiapine-treated than placebo-treated patients achieved a response (p < 0.001). The average quetiapine dose in responders was approximately 600 mg daily. Of adverse events occurring in > or = 5% of patients, quetiapine-treated patients had a significantly greater incidence versus placebo of somnolence (16.3% vs. 4.0%), dry mouth (15.8% vs. 3%), weight gain (9.1% vs. 1.5%) and dizziness (6.7% vs. 2.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The data from this combined analysis support the results from the individual studies and indicate that quetiapine monotherapy is effective across a broad range of mood symptoms, fast-acting and well tolerated in the treatment of mania.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled efficacy and safety study of quetiapine or lithium as monotherapy for mania in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine monotherapy versus placebo for the treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder. METHOD: In an international, multicenter, double-blind, parallel-group, 12-week study, patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar I disorder (manic episode) were randomly assigned to treatment with quetiapine (flexibly dosed up to 800 mg/day), placebo, or lithium. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score at day 21. Data were gathered from April 2001 to May 2002. RESULTS: More patients in the quetiapine (72/107) and lithium (67/98) groups completed the study compared with the placebo group (35/97). Improvement (reduction) in YMRS score was significantly greater for quetiapine than placebo at day 7 (-8.03 vs. -4.89; p < .01), and the difference between groups continued to increase over time to day 21 (-14.6 vs. -6.7; p < .001) and to endpoint at day 84 (-20.3 vs. -9.0; p < .001). Significantly more quetiapine patients compared with placebo patients fulfilled YMRS response criteria at day 21 (53.3% vs. 27.4%; p < .001) and at day 84 (72.0% vs. 41.1%; p < .001). Quetiapine was also superior to placebo in efficacy at day 21 and day 84 by all secondary measures. Lithium-treated patients improved significantly compared with placebo patients and similarly to quetiapine-treated patients on the primary efficacy measure. The most common adverse events for quetiapine were dry mouth, somnolence, and weight gain, while lithium was associated with tremor and insomnia. The quetiapine and placebo groups had similar, low levels of extrapyramidal symptom-related adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine demonstrated superior efficacy to placebo in patients with bipolar mania and was well tolerated.

Quetiapine versus placebo in combination with lithium or divalproex for the treatment of bipolar mania.

Quetiapine (QTP) combined with lithium (Li) or divalproex (DVP) for the treatment of mania was evaluated in 2 double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Patients were randomized to 3 or 6 weeks of treatment with QTP plus Li/DVP or placebo (PBO) plus Li/DVP. Quetiapine was dosed up to 800 mg/d; Li was dosed to achieve serum concentrations of 0.7-1.0 mEq/L and DVP to 50-100 microg/mL. A total of 402 patients were randomized: 197 to QTP + Li/DVP and 205 to PBO + Li/DVP. The mean quetiapine dose in responders was 492 (+/-204) mg/d. Improvement in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) at day 21 in the QTP + Li/DVP group (-15.29) was statistically superior to the PBO + Li/DVP group (-12.19) (P < 0.05). A statistically significant difference in favor of quetiapine was observed within the first week (P < 0.05). Significantly more QTP + Li/DVP patients achieved a response (> or =50% decrease in the YMRS) at day 21 (QTP + Li/DVP, 55.7%; PBO + Li/DVP, 41.6%;P < 0.01). Improvements in Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Severity of Illness scores by day 21 were also significantly greater in QTP + Li/DVP-treated patients (-1.59) versus PBO + Li/DVP (-1.19) (P < 0.01). Common adverse events (> or =5% and twice that in the PBO + Li/DVP group) in the QTP + Li/DVP group were somnolence, dry mouth, and asthenia. Quetiapine combined with Li/DVP was not associated with extrapyramidal symptoms (including akathisia) or emergent depression. More QTP + Li/DVP-treated patients completed the trial, and there was no difference in discontinuation rates due to adverse events between the two groups. Quetiapine, in combination with lithium or divalproex, is well tolerated and has superior efficacy to lithium or divalproex alone in the treatment of bipolar mania.

A comparison of extrapyramidal symptoms in older outpatients treated with quetiapine or risperidone.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the tolerability of quetiapine with risperidone in older outpatients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Post hoc analysis of a subset of older patients (aged 60-80; n = 92) from a randomized, 4-month, multicenter, open-label trial comparing quetiapine and risperidone in an outpatient setting. Participants had various neuropsychiatric disorders associated with psychosis as defined by criteria from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome measure was an extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) checklist, used to assess motor symptoms, including parkinsonism, at baseline and after treatment. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and the Clinical Global Impression scale were used to assess therapeutic efficacy. RESULTS: Substantial EPS (defined as EPS requiring a dosage adjustment or use of medication to reduce EPS) occurred less often with quetiapine (median dosage, 200 mg/day) than with risperidone (median dosage, 3 mg/day); odds ratio, 0.31 (P < 0.03). Quetiapine was also less likely than risperidone to cause akathisia or hypertonia. Both compounds produced comparable reductions in PANSS scores. CONCLUSIONS: Interpretation of findings in this report is limited by the open-label design of the study and the post hoc nature of this analysis. However, the results suggest that quetiapine, when given within the recommended dosage range, has a benign EPS profile, with potentially greater tolerability and comparable efficacy to risperidone in older outpatients with psychotic disorders.

A random-assignment, double-blind, clinical trial of once- vs twice-daily administration of quetiapine fumarate in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of administering quetiapine once vs twice daily. METHOD: Utilizing a double-blind design, 21 hospitalized adult men or women with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, who had received unchanged doses (for 2 weeks) of either 400 or 600 mg daily of quetiapine administered in 2 doses, were randomly assigned to once- or twice-daily administration for 4 weeks and then crossed over to the opposite dosing regimen for an additional 4 weeks. Standard psychopathology and safety measures were used in the study. RESULTS: Nearly 70% (15/21) of the subjects met the a priori efficacy responder criteria with no statistical differences in response between those assigned to once- or twice-daily quetiapine administration. Statistical analyses confirmed that most subjects maintained efficacy during the switch to once- or twice-daily administration with quetiapine. A minority (15%) did experience worsening of symptoms or orthostatic hypotension during the crossover. Quetiapine was generally well tolerated at either twice- or once-daily administration. CONCLUSIONS: These pilot data suggest that it is clinically feasible to switch most quetiapine-treated subjects receiving a therapeutic twice-daily dosing schedule to a once-daily regimen. A minority may experience worsening of symptoms or orthostatic hypotension during the switch. This strategy of administering quetiapine entirely at bedtime may promote improved adherence to treatment.

Efficacy of quetiapine and risperidone against depressive symptoms in outpatients with psychosis.

BACKGROUND: The treatment of psychotic symptoms in patients with mood disorders is a complex challenge. Antipsychotic medications in these individuals may be associated with extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), worsening of depression, and functional impairment. Atypical antipsychotics such as quetiapine and risperidone are associated with a decreased incidence of adverse events such as EPS. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine and risperidone for the treatment of depressive symptoms in outpatients with psychosis. METHOD: In this 4-month, multicenter, open-label trial, patients were randomly assigned in a 3:1 ratio of quetiapine to risperidone, and both drugs were flexibly dosed. Eligible patients had psychoses and demonstrated 1 of several DSM-IV diagnoses, including schizoaffective disorder, bipolar I disorder, major depressive disorder, delusional disorder, Alzheimer's dementia, schizophreniform disorder, vascular dementia, and substance abuse dementia. Patients were classified as mood disordered if they had bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, or schizoaffective disorder. Efficacy was assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale and the Clinical Global Impressions scale. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) was used to assess the level of depressive symptoms. The primary tolerability assessment was presence or absence of substantial EPS, defined as EPS severe enough to require an alteration in treatment. RESULTS: A total of 554 patients were randomly assigned to quetiapine and 175 to risperidone. Mean doses at 16 weeks were 318 mg for quetiapine and 4.4 mg for risperidone. Although both agents produced improvements in mean HAM-D scores, quetiapine produced a greater improvement than risperidone in all patients (p =.0015). Within the mood-diagnosed population, incidences of both substantial EPS (p =.001) and at least moderate EPS (p =.0373) occurred significantly less frequently among patients taking quetiapine. For patients with non-mood diagnoses, incidences of substantial EPS were fewer for patients taking quetiapine than for those taking risperidone (p =.062); however, this was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that quetiapine may be a useful agent in the management of depressive symptoms in patients with psychosis.