Twenty-Four-Hour Measures of Heart Rate-Corrected QT Interval, Peak-to-End of the T-Wave, and Peak-to-End of the T-Wave/Corrected QT Interval Ratio During Antipsychotic Treatment.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: Prolonged ventricular repolarization, measured by heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation, might be a biomarker for risk of torsade de pointes (TdP) and sudden cardiac death. However, the predictive value of QTc has been challenged, and a component of QTc, peak-to-end of the T-wave (Tpe), and a high Tpe/QT ratio might be superior biomarkers because they better reflect increased transmural dispersion of ventricular myocyte repolarization, which can lead to TDP. The purpose of this pilot study was to provide the first measurements of heart rate, QTc, Tpe, Tpe/QTc, and their variability over 24 hours in medication-free patients with schizophrenia, during treatment with ziprasidone or other antipsychotic drugs, and healthy controls. METHODS: Subjects included 12 patients treated with ziprasidone, 30 treated with other antipsychotic drugs, 3 unmedicated patients, and 15 normal controls. Subjects underwent 24-hour analog Holter recording, and the recordings were digitized. A cardiologist blind to treatment selected multiple 10-cycle segments throughout each recording and measured the electrocardiogram metrics. RESULTS: Variability in QTc, Tpe, and Tpe/QTc over the 24 hours was present in all groups; 91.1% of patients and 100% of controls had 1 or more QTc values of 450 milliseconds or greater. Mean QTc length was significantly greater in the ziprasidone-treated than the non-ziprasidone-treated patients (P = 0.02). Mean Tpe was not elevated in the ziprasidone patients, whereas mean Tpe/QTc was lower (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The large variability in QTc, Tpe, and Tpe/QTc observed supports the need for 24-hour electrocardiogram recordings to provide an accurate assessment of risk of TdP. Heart rate-corrected QT interval alone does not capture the risk of TdP.

Adaptation of the robust method to large distributions of reference values: program modifications and comparison of alternative computational methods.

The objective of this research was to compute reference limits using reference values from patients entering pharmaceutical development clinical trials by the nonparametric method and the robust method of Horn and Pesce, with and without outlier exclusion, and compare the methods with respect to influence on the limits. Reference limits were computed for 38 analytes with over 130,000 subjects contributing reference values. Subjects were partitioned into 10 demographic strata for limit computation. Limits were computed for both 95- and 98-percentile reference intervals by both methods. For each reference interval and method, the limits were calculated with and without outliers. Outliers were excluded by the Horn algorithm. Irrespective of method, reference limits were expanded with the 98-percentile interval, but some expansions were small. Outlier exclusion contracted limits with more influence on the upper limit. The robust method contracted the upper limit to a meaningful degree and slightly expanded the lower limit for many analytes. Outlier exclusion and computation by the robust method have an increasing influence on analytes with right-skewed distributions of reference values from large populations not screened to exclude common, stable diseases and environmental factors that might affect analyte variability. The method has advantages for computation of reference limits used in clinical trial analyses.

Effects of atomoxetine on the QT interval in healthy CYP2D6 poor metabolizers.

AIM: The effects of atomoxetine (20 and 60 mg twice daily), 400 mg moxifloxacin and placebo on QT(c) in 131 healthy CYP2D6 poor metabolizer males were compared. METHODS: Atomoxetine doses were selected to result in plasma concentrations that approximated expected plasma concentrations at both the maximum recommended dose and at a supratherapeutic dose in CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers. Ten second electrocardiograms were obtained for time-matched baseline on days -2 and -1, three time points after dosing on day 1 for moxifloxacin and five time points on day 7 for atomoxetine and placebo. Maximum mean placebo-subtracted change from baseline model-corrected QT (QT(c)M) on day 7 was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: QT(c)M differences for atomoxetine 20 and 60 mg twice daily were 0.5 ms (upper bound of the one-sided 95% confidence interval 2.2 ms) and 4.2 ms (upper bound of the one-sided 95% confidence interval 6.0 ms), respectively. As plasma concentration of atomoxetine increased, a statistically significant increase in QT(c) was observed. The moxifloxacin difference from placebo met the a priori definition of non-inferiority. Maximum mean placebo-subtracted change from baseline QT(c)M for moxifloxacin was 4.8 ms and this difference was statistically significant. Moxifloxacin plasma concentrations were below the concentrations expected from the literature. However, the slope of the plasma concentration-QT(c) change observed was consistent with the literature. CONCLUSION: Atomoxetine was not associated with a clinically significant change in QT(c). However, a statistically significant increase in QT(c) was associated with increasing plasma concentrations.

Systematic decrements in QTc between the first and second day of contiguous daily ECG recordings under controlled conditions.

BACKGROUND: Many thorough QT (TQT) studies use a baseline day and double delta analysis to account for potential diurnal variation in QTc. However, little is known about systematic changes in the QTc across contiguous days when normal volunteers are brought into a controlled inpatient environment. METHODS: Two separate crossover TQT studies included 2 days of no treatment lead-in days with ECG collection preceding periods of drug treatment . In the first study, there were two pairs of such contiguous days with 10 replicate electrocardiograms (ECGs) collected at six time points, and in the second study, there were four pairs of contiguous days with nine replicate ECGs collected at five time points. These lead-in day pairs provided the opportunity to evaluate any systematic changes across contiguous first and second days of an inpatient environment. Within-patient consistency of change across pairs of days as well as within day, diurnal variation could also be evaluated. RESULTS: Modest (4.2 ms [range 1.9-6.5 ms]) but consistent decreases (significant [P < 0.05] for all 32 comparisons) were observed (probability: ≤5.4 × 10(-16)). Although group behavior with respect to QTc was consistent, individual subjects demonstrated substantial variability across pairs of days. Evidence of diurnal variation was weak and inconsistent. Magnitude of any diurnal variation was less than magnitude of change across days. CONCLUSIONS: Subjects show a systematic decrease in QTc from first day to second day of inpatient status and do not demonstrate a significant diurnal pattern. The magnitude of this systematic change is sufficient to influence QTc study interpretation.

Reference Limits for Outlier Analyses in Randomized Clinical Trials.

BACKGROUND: Reference limits used in clinical medicine to screen and manage patients are typically developed nonparametrically using reference values from a limited number of healthy subjects using a 95th percentile reference interval. We have evaluated alternative methods of computation and the resulting limits for use in the analyses of treatment-emergent outliers in clinical trials. METHODS: We developed a set of alternative reference limits for 38 laboratory analytes based on alternative statistical methods and assessed their relative performance in clinical trial analysis. Performance assessment was based on the clinical credibility of the limits, inferential statistical performance, consideration of incidences for the test drug and control (placebo) in cases where the drug was reasonably believed to be associated with a change in an analyte (positive cases), and in cases where prior analyses failed to demonstrate a change associated with the drug (negative cases). RESULTS: Based on consideration of these cases, no single method resulted in optimal limits for all cases considered. However, with the limits developed using clinical trial subjects' values at baseline as reference values, excluding outliers, the robust method and the 98th percentile interval appeared to produce optimal limits across the greatest number of cases considered. CONCLUSION: Although no single method of limit computation will result in optimal limits for all outlier analyses for all analytes across all clinical trials, the 98th percentile reference interval robust limits based on clinical trial reference values appeared superior to multiple alternatives considered for such analyses.

The combined use of ibutilide as an active control with intensive electrocardiographic sampling and signal averaging as a sensitive method to assess the effects of tadalafil on the human QT interval.

OBJECTIVES: This study was designed to evaluate effects of tadalafil, a phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitor used for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), on the QT interval. BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is common in men with ED. Men with cardiovascular disease and ED may have decreased cardiac repolarization reserve. METHODS: Effects of tadalafil (100 mg by mouth), ibutilide (0.002 mg/kg intravenously), and placebo on the QT interval in healthy men were compared (placebo and tadalafil [n = 90], with a subset [n = 61] receiving all treatments; mean age 30 years, range 18 to 53 years). Electrocardiographic sampling was done for two days before treatment and on treatment days. The QT was corrected for RR interval with five correction methods, including an individual correction (QTcI). Plasma concentrations of tadalafil were measured to evaluate concentration-QT effect relationships. RESULTS: At the time corresponding to maximum plasma concentration of tadalafil, the mean difference in the change in QTcI between tadalafil and placebo was 2.8 ms; tadalafil was equivalent to placebo (a priori, upper limit of 90% confidence interval < 10 ms [actual = 4.4 ms]; post hoc, upper limit of 95% confidence interval < 5 ms [actual = 4.8]). The active control, ibutilide, significantly increased QTcI by 6.9 and 8.9 ms compared with tadalafil and placebo, respectively. Similar statistical results were obtained with four additional QT correction methods. No subject had a QTcI > or = 450 ms or an increase in QTcI > or = 30 ms with any treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the a priori statistical test of equivalence, placebo and high-dose tadalafil produced equivalent effects on the QT interval. This study reliably discerned 5- to 10-ms changes in corrected QT in the ibutilide active control group.

Tadalafil improved erectile function at twenty-four and thirty-six hours after dosing in men with erectile dysfunction: US trial.

In a previous study assessing tadalafil for the treatment of erectile dysfunction (ED), tadalafil 20 mg was shown to improve erectile function for up to 36 hours vs placebo. This study sought to demonstrate the effectiveness of both 10- and 20-mg tadalafil vs placebo at 2 prespecified assigned times of 24 and 36 hours postdosing. This double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study randomized 483 men with ED into 6 groups according to a combination of treatment (placebo, tadalafil 10 or 20 mg) and assigned time (24 or 36 hours) for intercourse attempts. Patients were stratified by baseline ED severity based on Erectile Function Domain scores. The study had 4 phases: a 4-week run-in (no ED medication taken); a 2- to 4-week equilibration (dosing as needed); a 4- to 6-week assessment; and a 6-month open-label extension. During the assessment phase, men took a total of 4 doses of study medication, each dose separated by more than or equal to 7 days. Efficacy was measured as the mean per-patient percentage of successful intercourse attempts (Sexual Encounter Profile Diary Question 3: SEP3) during the assessment phase. Men taking either 10- or 20-mg tadalafil had a significant increase in SEP3 from baseline scores vs placebo at both 24 hours (P = .038 and <.001 for 10 and 20 mg, respectively) and 36 hours (P < .001 for both doses) postdose. The mean per-patient percentages of successful intercourse attempts for the 24-hour time point were 41.8%, 55.8%, and 67.3% for placebo and tadalafil 10 and 20 mg, respectively; for the 36-hour time point, the mean per-patient percentages were 32.8%, 56.2%, and 61.9% for placebo and tadalafil 10 and 20 mg, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were headache, back pain, dyspepsia, and nasopharyngitis. Both 10- and 20-mg tadalafil improved erectile function for up to 36 hours postdosing in men with ED of varied severity.

Hyperglycemic clamp assessment of insulin secretory responses in normal subjects treated with olanzapine, risperidone, or placebo.

The goal of this study was to evaluate the effect of olanzapine or risperidone treatment on beta-cell function in healthy volunteers. Subjects were randomly assigned to single-blind therapy with olanzapine (10 mg/d; n = 17), risperidone (4 mg/d; n = 13), or placebo (n = 18) for 15-17 d. Insulin secretion was quantitatively assessed at baseline and the end of the study period using the hyperglycemic clamp. Weight increased significantly (P < 0.01) in the olanzapine (2.8 +/- 1.7 kg) and risperidone (3.1 +/- 2.1 kg) treatment groups. An increase ( approximately 25%) in the insulin response to hyperglycemia and a decrease ( approximately 18%) in the insulin sensitivity index were observed after treatment with olanzapine and risperidone. The change in insulin response was correlated (r = 0.5576; P = 0.019) with a change in body mass index. When the impact of weight change was accounted for by multivariate regression analyses, no significant change in insulin response or insulin sensitivity was detected after treatment with olanzapine or risperidone. We found no evidence that treatment of healthy volunteers with olanzapine or risperidone decreased the insulin secretory response to a prolonged hyperglycemic challenge. The results of this study do not support the hypothesis that olanzapine or risperidone directly impair pancreatic beta-cell function.

Comparison of rapidly acting intramuscular olanzapine, lorazepam, and placebo: a double-blind, randomized study in acutely agitated patients with dementia.

This double-blind study investigated the efficacy and safety of rapid-acting intramuscular olanzapine in treating agitation associated with Alzheimer's disease and/or vascular dementia. At 2 h, olanzapine (5.0 mg, 2.5 mg) and lorazepam (1.0 mg) showed significant improvement over placebo on the PANSS Excited Component (PANSS-EC) and Agitation-Calmness Evaluation Scale (ACES), and both 5.0 mg olanzapine and lorazepam showed superiority to placebo on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory. At 24 h, both olanzapine groups maintained superiority over placebo on the PANSS-EC; lorazepam did not. Olanzapine (5.0 mg) and lorazepam improved ACES scores more than placebo. Simpson-Angus and Mini-Mental State Examination scores did not change significantly from baseline. Sedation (ACES > or =8), adverse events, and laboratory analytes were not significantly different from placebo for any treatment. No significant differences among treatment groups were seen in extrapyramidal symptoms or in corrected QT interval at either 2 h or 24 h, and no significant differences among treatment groups were seen in vital signs, including orthostasis. Intramuscular injection of olanzapine may therefore provide substantial benefit in rapidly treating inpatients with acute dementia-related agitation.

An integrated analysis of acute treatment-emergent extrapyramidal syndrome in patients with schizophrenia during olanzapine clinical trials: comparisons with placebo, haloperidol, risperidone, or clozapine.

BACKGROUND: The frequency and severity of extrapyramidal syndrome (EPS) were evaluated in patients with DSM-III or DSM-IV schizophrenia in the acute phase (- 8 weeks) of randomized, double-blind, controlled trials from the integrated olanzapine clinical trial database. METHOD: This retrospective analysis included 23 clinical trials and 4611 patients from November 11, 1991, through July 31, 2001. Incidences of dystonic, parkinsonian, and akathisia events were compared using treatment-emergent adverse-event data. Categorical analyses of Simpson-Angus Scale and Barnes Akathisia Scale (BAS) scores, use of anticholinergic medications, and baseline-to-endpoint changes in Simpson-Angus Scale and BAS scores were compared. RESULTS: A significantly smaller percentage of olanzapine-treated patients experienced dystonic events than did haloperidol- (p <.001) or risperidone-treated patients (p =.047). A significantly greater percentage of haloperidol-treated patients experienced parkinsonian (p <.001) and akathisia (p <.001) events than did olanzapine-treated patients. Categorical analysis of Simpson-Angus Scale scores showed significantly more haloperidol- (p <.001) or risperidone-treated patients (p =.004) developed parkinsonism than did olanzapine-treated patients. Olanzapine-treated patients experienced significantly greater reductions in Simpson-Angus Scale scores than did haloperidol- (p <.001), risperidone- (p <.001), or clozapine-treated (p =.032) patients. Categorical analysis of BAS scores showed significantly more haloperidol-treated patients experienced treatment-emergent akathisia versus olanzapine-treated patients (p <.001). Significantly greater reductions in BAS scores were experienced during olanzapine treatment versus placebo (p =.007), haloperidol (p <.001), and risperidone (p =.004) treatments. A significantly smaller percentage of olanzapine-treated patients received anticholinergic medications compared with that of haloperidol- (p <.001) or risperidone-treated patients (p =.018). Compared with that in olanzapine-treated patients, the duration of anticholinergic cotreatment was significantly longer among haloperidol- (p <.001) or risperidone-treated patients (p =.040) and significantly shorter among clozapine-treated patients (p =.021). CONCLUSION: This analysis of available data from olanzapine clinical trials lends additional support to olanzapine's favorable EPS profile.

Absence of clinically important HERG channel blockade by three compounds that inhibit phosphodiesterase 5--sildenafil, tadalafil, and vardenafil.

Compounds that inhibit phosphodiesterase 5 (PDE5) have been developed for the treatment of erectile dysfunction. Because men with erectile dysfunction frequently have comorbid cardiovascular disease, they may have limited cardiac repolarization reserve and be at risk of arrhythmia if treated with medications that prolong ventricular repolarization. The human ether-a-go-go related gene (HERG) channel is important for repolarization in human myocardium and is a common target for drugs that prolong the QT interval. We studied the ability of three compounds that inhibit PDE5--sildenafil, tadalafil, and vardenafil--to block the HERG channel. Using a whole cell variant of the patch-clamp method, the HERG current was measured in a stably transfected human embryonic kidney cell line expressing the HERG channel. The compounds produced dose-dependent reductions in HERG current amplitude over a concentration range of 0.1 to 100 microM. The IC50 values were 12.8 microM for vardenafil and 33.3 microM for sildenafil. Because the maximum soluble concentration of tadalafil (100 microM) produced only a 50.9% inhibition of the HERG current amplitude, the IC50 value for tadalafil could not be determined with the Hill equation. Tadalafil had the weakest capacity to block the HERG channel, producing a 50.9% blockade at the maximum soluble concentration (100 microM), compared with 86.2% for vardenafil (100 microM) and 75.2% for sildenafil (100 microM). In conclusion, the concentrations of the PDE5 inhibitors required to evoke a 50% inhibition of the HERG current were well above reported therapeutic plasma concentrations of free and total compound. None of the three compounds was a potent blocker of the HERG channel.

Fluoxetine and norfluoxetine plasma concentrations during relapse-prevention treatment.

BACKGROUND: Virtually no attention has been given to the relationship between antidepressant plasma drug concentrations and relapse-prevention during maintenance therapy. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationship between steady-state plasma drug concentrations and outcome during relapse-prevention therapy with fluoxetine. METHODS: The patients studied had responded to acute fluoxetine treatment for major depression (defined by DSM-III-R). Patients who met criteria for remission after 10-12 weeks of open-label acute fluoxetine therapy (N=395 of 839 patients), were randomly assigned to one of four treatment arms (50 weeks of fluoxetine, 38 weeks of fluoxetine followed by 12 weeks of placebo, 14 weeks of fluoxetine followed by 36 weeks of placebo and 50 weeks of placebo). Plasma fluoxetine and norfluoxetine concentrations were measured (1) after 4 and 8 weeks of open-label treatment and (2) at the beginning and after 14 weeks of double-blind, relapse-prevention therapy. RESULTS: Mean drug plasma levels were stable throughout the study. There was no significant difference in steady state plasma levels for the patients who relapsed compared to those who completed fluoxetine therapy without relapsing after 14, 38 or 50 weeks of fluoxetine relapse-prevention treatment. In addition, time-to-relapse was not related to steady-state drug plasma levels. Finally, after dividing patients into two groups based on their drug plasma levels, no significant differences were seen in the cumulative proportions of patients staying well during relapse-prevention therapy. DISCUSSION: Plasma concentrations of fluoxetine and/or its metabolite norfluoxetine, are not correlated with relapse in patients treated with a fixed dose of 20 mg/day fluoxetine. Fluoxetine plasma levels cannot be used to guide relapse-prevention treatment.

Extrapyramidal symptom profiles assessed with the Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptom Scale: comparison with Western scales in the clinical double-blind studies of schizophrenic patients treated with either olanzapine or haloperidol.

The superiority of olanzapine to haloperidol with respect to a decreased incidence of treatment-emergent extrapyramidal syndromes (EPS) in patients with schizophrenia was demonstrated in studies conducted in both Japan and Western countries. EPS measurements used in Western countries included the Simpson-Angus, Barnes akathisia and the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale, while the Drug-Induced Extrapyramidal Symptom Scale (DIEPSS) was used in Japan. The aim of this study was to clarify how the DIEPSS captures EPS profiles. The baseline prevalence and treatment-emergent incidence of EPS in Japanese schizophrenic patients treated with olanzapine or haloperidol were retrospectively compared as assessed by the DIEPSS to the prevalence and incidence of EPS in primarily Caucasian schizophrenic patients who were treated with olanzapine or haloperidol. Specifically, the prevalence and incidence of dyskinesia, akathisia and parkinsonism were compared between the Japanese trial and an international trial to examine if appropriate definitions using the DIEPSS can be derived assuming that a comparable prevalence and incidence of the syndromes would be observed when any differences in residual antipsychotic exposure at the initiation of study treatment were accounted for. For the incidence of all EPS syndromes, odds ratios were observed to be similar between the two studies, indicating that appropriate criteria for the clinical diagnosis of the EPS syndromes could be established based on the DIEPSS. This preliminary and retrospective work suggests that the DIEPSS can be used to operationally define the presence or absence, and make the clinical diagnosis, of specific EPS syndromes.

Effects of intramuscular olanzapine vs. haloperidol and placebo on QTc intervals in acutely agitated patients.

Prolongation of the QTc interval has been reported during treatment with oral antipsychotic agents and may be more pronounced during parenteral administration. Pooled QTc interval data from acutely agitated patients across four double-blind trials were compared. Databases included: placebo-controlled [two schizophrenia, one bipolar mania trials (n=565)]; haloperidol-controlled [two schizophrenia trials (n=482)]; geriatric placebo-controlled [1 dementia trial (n=204)]. Patients received 1-3 injections of intramuscular (IM) olanzapine (2.5-10 mg/injection), IM haloperidol (7.5 mg/injection), or IM placebo. At 2 and 24 h after IM olanzapine treatment, the mean QTc interval decreased approximately 3 ms from baseline in the placebo- and haloperidol-controlled databases. When there was a statistically significant difference between IM olanzapine and IM placebo, QTc intervals decreased during treatment with IM olanzapine and increased with IM placebo. The incidences of prolonged (endpoint >/=99th percentile of healthy adults or >/=500 ms) or lengthened (increase >/=60 ms) QTc intervals during treatment with IM olanzapine (<3% placebo- and haloperidol-controlled databases, <12% geriatric placebo-controlled database) were never significantly greater than with comparators. These data suggest that IM olanzapine has a favorable QTc interval profile in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia, bipolar mania, or dementia.

Weight changes over time in adults treated with the oral or depot formulations of olanzapine: a pooled analysis of 86 clinical trials.

Several analytical approaches were used to characterize time progression of weight changes observed in adults treated with olanzapine from a 12,425-patient database of 86 studies of oral and depot formulations of olanzapine (mean modal dose 13.3 mg/day). Descriptive mean profile plots for completer and modified completer groups showed weight increasing throughout each observed period, with apparent slowing in rate of change after 3 or 4 months. Mixed-effects model repeated measures analyses also showed that weight increased most rapidly early in treatment and slowed within 2 to 4 months. The slowing in rate of change was greatest for patients obese at baseline and least for patients underweight at baseline. This pattern was also observed in a nonparametric regression-based profile. Based on visual inspection of profile plots, 2, 3, 4, and 5 months were postulated as potential 'change points' beyond which rate of increase might slow, and the proportions of patients whose slope after each change point was ≤ 90% of the slope before change point were calculated. Over 85% of patients who gained weight showed slowing rate of weight change after each postulated change point. Potential consequences of weight gain should be considered prior to starting olanzapine. Olanzapine-treated patients should receive regular weight monitoring.

Suicidality and risk of suicide--definition, drug safety concerns, and a necessary target for drug development: a brief report.

OBJECTIVE: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: This gathering of participants from academia, government, and industry brought together experts in suicide prevention, clinical trial design, psychometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, and genetics, as well as research psychiatrists involved in studies in studies of psychiatric disorders associated with elevated suicide risk across the life cycle. The process involved reviews of the relevant literature, and a series of 6 breakout sessions focused on specific questions of interest. EVIDENCE: Each of the participants at the meeting received references relevant to the formal presentations (as well as the slides for the presentations) for their review prior to the meeting. In addition, the assessment instruments of suicidal ideation/behavior were reviewed in relationship to standard measures of validity, reliability, and clinical utility, and these findings were discussed at length in relevant breakout groups, in the final plenary session, and in the preparation of the article. Consensus and dissenting views were noted. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Discussion and questions followed each formal presentation during the plenary sessions. Approximately 6 questions per breakout group were prepared in advance by members of the Steering Committee and each breakout group chair. Consensus in the breakout groups was achieved by nominal group process. Consensus recommendations and any dissent were reviewed for each breakout group at the final plenary session. All plenary sessions were recorded and transcribed by a court stenographer. Following the transcript, with input by each of the authors, the final paper went through 14 drafts. The output of the meeting was organized into this brief report and the accompanying full article from which it is distilled. The full article was developed by the authors with feedback from all participants at the meeting and represents a consensus view. Any areas of disagreement at the conference have been noted in the text. CONCLUSIONS: The term suicidality is not as clinically useful as more specific terminology (ideation, behavior, attempts, and suicide). Most participants applauded the FDA's encouragement of standard definitions and definable expectations for investigators and industry sponsors. Further research of available assessment instruments is needed to verify their utility, reliability, and validity in identifying suicide-associated treatment-emergent adverse effects and/or a signal of efficacy in suicide prevention trials. The FDA needs to systematically monitor postmarketing events by encouraging the development of a validated instrument for postmarketing surveillance of suicidal ideation, behavior, and risk. Over time, the FDA, industry, and clinical researchers should evaluate the impact of the requirement that all central nervous system clinical drug trials must include a Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA)-compatible screening instrument for assessing and documenting the occurrence of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behavior. Finally, patients at high risk for suicide can safely be included in clinical trials, if proper precautions are followed.

Suicidality and risk of suicide--definition, drug safety concerns, and a necessary target for drug development: a consensus statement.

OBJECTIVE: To address issues concerning potential treatment-emergent "suicidality," a consensus conference was convened March 23-24, 2009. PARTICIPANTS: This gathering of participants from academia, government, and industry brought together experts in suicide prevention, clinical trial design, psychometrics, pharmacoepidemiology, and genetics, as well as research psychiatrists involved in studies of major depression, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, substance abuse/dependence, and other psychiatric disorders associated with elevated suicide risk across the life cycle. The process involved reviews of the relevant literature, and a series of 6 breakout sessions focused on specific questions of interest. EVIDENCE: Each of the participants at the meeting received references relevant to the formal presentations (as well as the slides for the presentations) for their review prior to the meeting. In addition, the assessment instruments of suicidal ideation/behavior were reviewed in relationship to standard measures of validity, reliability, and clinical utility, and these findings were discussed at length in relevant breakout groups, in the final plenary session, and in the preparation of the article. Consensus and dissenting views were noted. CONSENSUS PROCESS: Discussion and questions followed each formal presentation during the plenary sessions. Approximately 6 questions per breakout group were prepared in advance by members of the Steering Committee and each breakout group chair. Consensus in the breakout groups was achieved by nominal group process. Consensus recommendations and any dissent were reviewed for each breakout group at the final plenary session. All plenary sessions were recorded and transcribed by a court stenographer. Following the transcript, with input by each of the authors, the final paper went through 14 drafts. The output of the meeting was organized into this scholarly article, which has been developed by the authors with feedback from all participants at the meeting and represents a consensus view. Any areas of disagreement have been noted. CONCLUSIONS: The term suicidality is not as clinically useful as more specific terminology (ideation, behavior, attempts, and suicide). Most participants applauded the FDA's effort to promote standard definitions and definable expectations for investigators and industry sponsors by endorsing the terminology in the Columbia Classification Algorithm of Suicide Assessment (C-CASA). Further research of available assessment instruments is needed to verify their utility, reliability, and validity in identifying suicide-associated treatment-emergent adverse effects and/or a signal of efficacy in suicide prevention trials. The FDA needs to build upon its new authority to systematically monitor postmarketing events by encouraging the development of a validated instrument for postmarketing surveillance of suicidal ideation, behavior, and risk within informative large health care-related databases in the United States and abroad. Over time, the FDA, industry, and clinical researchers should evaluate the impact of the current Agency requirement that all CNS clinical drug trials must include a C-CASA-compatible screening instrument for assessing and documenting the occurrence of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behavior. Finally, patients at high risk for suicide can safely be included in clinical trials, if proper precautions are followed, and they need to be included to enable premarket assessments of the risks and benefits of medications related to suicidal ideation, suicidal behavior, and suicide in such patients.

Early predictors of weight gain risk during treatment with olanzapine: analysis of pooled data from 58 clinical trials.

This analysis evaluated the usefulness of different predictors in identifying patient risk of substantial weight gain (SWG) during olanzapine treatment. Data were from 58 studies with 3826 patients diagnosed with schizophrenia, schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar mania, bipolar depression, or borderline personality disorder. The primary definition for SWG was gaining >/=12% of baseline weight by endpoint (30 weeks +/-5 weeks); other definitions of SWG were also examined. Potential predictors of SWG included baseline patient characteristics, weight change, and percent weight change at Weeks 1, 2, 3, and 4 after olanzapine initiation. To facilitate model building and validation, the data set was randomly partitioned into training (N = 1912), validation (N = 1149), and test (N = 765) sets and 2 complementary analytic techniques were used: logistic regression with stepwise variable selection followed by receiver operating characteristic analysis for evaluation of resulting candidate models and decision trees. Approximately 24% of patients gained >/=12% of their initial weight, about 30% gained >/=10%, and 45% gained >/=7% or >/=5 kg by the 30-week endpoint. Baseline covariates significantly and positively associated with probability of SWG were lower baseline body mass index, younger age, female sex, United States residency, and African ethnicity. Early weight changes substantially improved the prediction of the risk for longer-term SWG. These results confirm that cut-offs for weight gain during the first 4 weeks of treatment may be useful in evaluating SWG risk for an individual patient.

Design and analysis considerations for thorough QT studies employing conventional (10 s, 12-lead) ECG recordings.

The QT interval from the ECG cannot be measured precisely. The relationship of the QT interval to the RR interval within individuals across time and different RR values, and across individuals eludes complete understanding. Intrinsic beat-to-beat variability in QT interval corrected for heart rate (QTc interval) is not trivial. Therefore, it is difficult to determine a valid and reliable estimate of the time for ventricular repolarization based on the QTc interval. Yet, it must be demonstrated that a drug does not result in an increase in the QTc interval that exceeds 5 ms with some reasonable degree of certainty to be quite confident that the drug does not convey some risk of ventricular tachydysrhythmia due to delayed ventricular repolarization. This demonstration can be a Herculean task due to the magnitude of variability in the QTc interval. Design features and analytical methods that might be used in the thorough QT study to improve the chances of demonstrating the true relationship between a drug and QTc interval are reviewed.

All-cause treatment discontinuation in schizophrenia during treatment with olanzapine relative to other antipsychotics: an integrated analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Treatment continuation, as measured by time to all-cause treatment discontinuation, is a broad measure of overall treatment effectiveness. This integrated analysis compared the likelihood of discontinuation from olanzapine treatment versus other antipsychotics among patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: Clinical trials of all sponsors were included if they met the following criteria: double-blind, randomized, comparative; duration of 12 weeks or longer; no mandatory discontinuation before 12 weeks; and schizophrenia-spectrum disorders; 20 patients or more per treatment. Weighted mean hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals were calculated from discontinuation time. Meta-analyses were performed for the following comparators that had at least 2 studies: haloperidol (5 studies), risperidone (5 studies), ziprasidone (2 studies), clozapine (3 studies), and perphenazine (2 studies) (13 studies in total; 3 included more than 1 comparator). Only 1 eligible published study was found for fluphenazine, amisulpride, and quetiapine; therefore, meta-analyses could not be performed for these comparators. RESULTS: Significantly (P < 0.05) greater likelihood of discontinuation relative to olanzapine treatment (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval]) was observed for haloperidol (1.4 [1.2-1.7]), risperidone (1.3 [1.1-1.6]), ziprasidone (1.6 [1.4-2.0]), and quetiapine (1.4 [1.1-1.9]), but not clozapine (1.2 [0.9-1.6]), fluphenazine (1.8 [0.8-4.3]), perphenazine (1.3 [0.7-2.1]), or amisulpride (1.1 [0.8-1.6]). CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that patients with schizophrenia and related disorders may continue olanzapine treatment longer than haloperidol, risperidone, ziprasidone, or quetiapine treatment.