Dose-Finding Study of Lorexys for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in Premenopausal Women.

INTRODUCTION: Prior medication treatment for hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) in women has left about half the subjects without benefit. Lorexys (LOR), a proprietary combination of the stimulating/excitatory dopamine-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor bupropion (BUP) and the sedating/inhibitory serotonergic agonist-antagonist trazodone (TRZ), was developed as a multifunctional solution for this problem. AIM: Test efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LOR in a range of doses in a combined phase IB/IIA study in premenopausal outpatients with HSDD. METHODS: Otherwise healthy premenopausal women from 25-50 years of age with HSDD were tested in an open-label, active-control, one-way crossover study, with three 4-week treatments of extended-release TRZ and/or sustained-release BUP. Evaluations were made before and after each treatment. A washout of at least a week followed each treatment. The order of treatments was a standard dose of BUP; a subtherapeutic dose of BUP and TRZ (LOR-low); and a threshold-therapeutic dose of BUP and TRZ (LOR-mod). A midpoint interim analysis was planned to consider adapting doses for efficacy or safety. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary efficacy measure was the Female Sexual Function Index, Desire domain; the main secondary efficacy measures included the Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised 13th item, on bother about low desire, and a Patient's Global Impression of Change. The main outcome comparison was the proportions of responders. Safety measures were elicited adverse events, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale 6-item SCREEN version, vital signs, electrocardiograms, and standard laboratory tests. RESULTS: Interim analysis did not require altering doses. Most evaluable subjects responded to LOR-mod (at the standard thresholds for response based on minimum clinically relevant difference from baseline, 79% on Female Sexual Function Index, Desire domain, 87% on Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised Item 13, and 79% on Patient's Global Impression of Change; each P < .05 vs BUP). As expected, close to half responded to BUP (38%, 45%, and 52%, respectively). Response to LOR-low was intermediate (not significant vs BUP). Sensitivity analyses to compensate for carryover effects supported the efficacy of LOR-mod. Elicited adverse events showed the expected profile of TRZ, but led to no sedative-type dropouts or worsening on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The open-label 1-way crossover design of this phase IB/IIA study limits conclusions, but the consistency of responder analyses showing superiority of LOR-mod dose over control, and the lack of central depressant dropouts, favor further development in double-blind placebo-control trials. STRENGTH & LIMITATIONS: Strengths include large margins of efficacy over control agent, rapid onset of action, and rigorous safety assessment. Limitations are open-label, cross-over design/lack of placebo control and 1-month duration of exposure. CONCLUSION: Moderate-dose LOR was generally well-tolerated and was significantly more effective than BUP (active control). The results seem highly favorable compared to previously tested agents. Pyke RE, Clayton AH. Dose-Finding Study of Lorexys for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in Premenopausal Women. J Sex Med 2019;16:1885-1894.

Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction: IV. Unique Aspects of Clinical Trials in Female Sexual Dysfunction.

The focus of this article, the fourth in the series, Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction, is on aspects of clinical trial design and measurement that are specific to clinical trials for treatments of female sexual dysfunction. Challenges in this area include the limited extent of treatment development and clinical trial research across the spectrum of female sexual dysfunctions, changing regulatory considerations, changing diagnostic criteria for female sexual dysfunction, and the need to articulate assessment procedures to these changes. Discussion focuses on approaches to addressing these challenges in clinical trials in female sexual dysfunction.

Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction: III. Unique Aspects of Clinical Trials in Male Sexual Dysfunction.

This series of articles, Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction, began with the discussion of a common expected standard for clinical trial design in male and female sexual dysfunction, a common rationale for the design of phase I to IV clinical trials, and common considerations for the selection of study population and study duration in male and female sexual dysfunction. The second article in this series discussed fundamental principles in development, validation, and selection of patient- (and partner-) reported outcome assessment. The third and present article in this series discusses selected aspects of sexual dysfunction that are that are unique to male sexual dysfunctions and relevant to the conduct of clinical trials of candidate treatments for men.

Quantitative and Qualitative Research in HSDD: The Difference Between Testing Theory and Generating New Theories.

Tiefer (2017) criticized our recent analysis of psychological treatment trials for HSDD (Pyke & Clayton, 2015) on what she claims to be scientific and "political" grounds. In the same letter, she alleged that we, and, by extension, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, promoted drugs to the detriment of psychological treatment of female sexual problems. Such accusations require a serious response.

Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction: I. Phase I to Phase IV Clinical Trial Design.

This series of articles outlines standards for clinical trials of treatments for male and female sexual dysfunctions, with a focus on research design and patient-reported outcome assessment. These articles consist of revision, updating, and integration of articles on standards for clinical trials in male and female sexual dysfunction from the 2010 International Consultation on Sexual Medicine developed by the authors as part of the 2015 International Consultation on Sexual Medicine. We are guided in this effort by several principles. In contrast to previous versions of these guidelines, we merge discussion of standards for clinical trials in male and female sexual dysfunction in an integrated approach that emphasizes the common foundational practices that underlie clinical trials in the two settings. We present a common expected standard for clinical trial design in male and female sexual dysfunction, a common rationale for the design of phase I to IV clinical trials, and common considerations for selection of study population and study duration in male and female sexual dysfunction. We present a focused discussion of fundamental principles in patient- (and partner-) reported outcome assessment and complete this series of articles with specific discussions of selected aspects of clinical trials that are unique to male and to female sexual dysfunction. Our consideration of standards for clinical trials in male and female sexual dysfunction attempts to embody sensitivity to existing and new regulatory guidance and to address implications of the evolution of the diagnosis of sexual dysfunction that have been brought forward in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition. The first article in this series focuses on phase I to phase IV clinical trial design considerations. Subsequent articles in this series focus on the measurement of patient-reported outcomes, unique aspects of clinical trial design for men, and unique aspects of clinical trial design for women.

Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction: II. Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.

The second article in this series, Standards for Clinical Trials in Male and Female Sexual Dysfunction, focuses on measurement of patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Together with the design of appropriate phase I to phase IV clinical trials, the development, validation, choice, and implementation of valid PRO measurements-the focus of the present article-form the foundation of research on treatments for male and female sexual dysfunctions. PRO measurements are assessments of any aspect of a patient's health status that come directly from the patient (ie, without the interpretation of the patient's responses by a physician or anyone else). PROs are essential for assessing male and female sexual dysfunction and treatment response, including symptom frequency and severity, personal distress, satisfaction, and other measurements of sexual and general health-related quality of life. Although there are some relatively objective measurements of sexual dysfunction (ie, intravaginal ejaculatory latency time, frequency of sexual activity, etc), these measurements do not comprehensively assess the occurrence and extent of sexual dysfunction or treatment on the patient's symptoms, functioning, and well-being. Data generated by a PRO instrument can provide evidence of a treatment benefit from the patient's perspective.

Psychological Treatment Trials for Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder: A Sexual Medicine Critique and Perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Publications claim efficacy for treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) in women with cognitive behavior therapy (CBT) and mindfulness meditation training (MMT). However, no review has evaluated the evidence for these therapies from the rigorous perspective of sexual medicine. AIMS: The aim of this study was to evaluate the published controlled trials of CBT and MMT for disorders of sexual desire from the perspective of sexual medicine standards of control paradigms, risk/benefit ratios, and clinical significance. METHODS: MEDLINE was reviewed from the last 10 years. Evaluated study quality via 10 metrics and efficacy as mean change, and proportion of responders and remitters. RESULTS: Three controlled trials support CBT and two controlled trials support MMT. The reports of the trials each lacked several scientific requirements: a hierarchy of endpoints with a planned primary endpoint, sufficient information on the intervention to reproduce it, randomization, adequate control, accepted measures of benefits and harms, compliance data, and/or outcomes of clinical relevance. CONCLUSIONS: Psychological treatments for HSDD are not yet supported by adequate clinical trials. The current scientific and regulatory standards for drug treatment trials should also be applicable to psychological treatment trials.

Validity of the decreased sexual desire screener for diagnosing hypoactive sexual desire disorder.

The decreased sexual desire screener is a brief diagnostic instrument for generalized acquired hypoactive sexual desire disorder in women. During the screening visit of 2 clinical trials, the authors assessed sensitivity of the decreased sexual desire screener in premenopausal women presenting with decreased sexual desire. The authors compared diagnoses of generalized acquired hypoactive sexual desire disorder made by clinicians who were not trained or specialized in the diagnosis of female sexual dysfunction using the decreased sexual desire screener with diagnoses made by expert clinicians after an extensive diagnostic interview. The sensitivity of the decreased sexual desire screener was 0.946 in a North American trial and 0.960 in a European trial.

Intended or unintended consequences? The likely implications of raising the bar for sexual dysfunction diagnosis in the proposed DSM-V revisions: 1. For women with incomplete loss of desire or sexual receptivity.

INTRODUCTION: Combining female sexual desire and arousal disorders is proposed for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5). Brotto et al. challenged our findings that the proposed criteria could potentially exclude from diagnosis or treatment a large number of women with distressing loss of function or in sexual desire, because (i) our samples were insufficiently severe; (ii) we sought to retain the current diagnostic criteria, whereas they contend that "the bar should be raised"; and (iii) the current sexual function diagnostic criteria are unreliable. AIM: Here we provide additional data to support our view suggesting that the proposed criteria would potentially exclude large numbers of women from diagnosis or treatment if they have moderate-to-marked (rather than severe) hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD), or HSDD with incomplete loss of receptivity. METHODS: In nontreatment validation studies of 481 women in North America and Europe, 231 women diagnosed with HSDD only were compared to women with no female sexual desire. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinicians experienced in sexual medicine determined the severity of HSDD using the standard Clinical Global Impression of Severity. Rating scale data were also used, including the clinician-rated Sexual Desire and Interest Inventory-Female and the self-rated Female Sexual Function Index, Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire, Female Sexual Distress Scale, and an e-Diary about desire during sexual events. RESULTS: The severity of the HSDD was rated by clinicians as generally moderate-to-marked, not mild. The women with HSDD scored as manifestly sexually dysfunctional and significantly sexually distressed, and reported markedly fewer satisfying sexual events compared to age-matched, non-dysfunctional controls, even for those with moderate or milder degrees of severity, providing compelling evidence that our sample of women with HSDD had clinically disordered sexual function. Yet the proposed criteria would apparently allow diagnosis (and therefore treatment) of only severe desire dysfunction. CONCLUSION: It would be counterproductive to combine the two disorders, to make individual criteria for the disorders more stringent or to require more such criteria for a diagnosis because such disorders tend to be distinct in presentation, in treatability with currently available therapies, and in logical approaches to be tested to improve therapy.

Intended or unintended consequences? The likely implications of raising the bar for sexual dysfunction diagnosis in the proposed DSM-V revisions: 2. For women with loss of subjective sexual arousal.

INTRODUCTION: Brotto proposes to combine female sexual desire and arousal disorders in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition. AIM: We provide evidence that the proposed criteria could potentially exclude from diagnosis or treatment a large number of women with distressing dysfunction in sexual arousal. METHODS: Rating scale data from nontreatment validation studies of patient-reported outcome measures including almost 500 women in North America and Europe, including 49 women diagnosed with arousal disorder only, were compared with the proposed criteria. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The main measures were an early version of the eDiary (an electronic diary on sexual activity) and four previously validated measures of female sexual dysfunction (FSD), the clinician-rated Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory-Female and the self-rated Female Sexual Function Index, Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire, and Female Sexual Distress Scale. Results. The women with female sexual arousal disorder (FSAD) scored as manifestly sexually dysfunctional and significantly sexually distressed. They had fewer satisfying sexual events (SSEs) vs. women with no FSD, with a lower proportion of SSEs, and significantly fewer orgasms. CONCLUSION: Despite evidence presented that women with FSAD have clinically disordered sexual function, our data also suggest that the majority of these women with FSAD would meet none of the six proposed "A" criteria for Sexual Interest/Arousal Disorder, raising new validity and utility concerns for the proposed diagnostic classification. Suggestions are made to modify the proposed new criteria so as to include such distressed women.

Treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder in premenopausal women: efficacy of flibanserin in the DAISY study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder (HSDD) is characterized by low sexual desire that causes marked distress or interpersonal difficulty. AIM: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of flibanserin, a postsynaptic 5-HT1A agonist/5-HT2A antagonist, in the treatment of premenopausal women with HSDD. METHODS: North American premenopausal women with HSDD (mean age 35 years) were randomized to 24 weeks' treatment with flibanserin 25 mg twice daily (N=396), 50 mg twice daily (N=392), 100 mg once daily at bedtime (N=395), or placebo (N=398). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Co-primary endpoints were changed from baseline to study end in number of satisfying sexual events (SSE) and sexual desire score, measured daily using an eDiary. Secondary endpoints included change in Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised (FSDS-R) total score and Item 13 score (distress due to low sexual desire), Female Sexual Function Index (FSFI) total and desire domain scores, and Patient's Global Impression of Improvement. RESULTS: Flibanserin 100 mg once daily was associated with an increase in SSE (P<0.01 vs. placebo) but the 25 mg and 50 mg twice daily doses were not. No group showed a significant increase in eDiary desire score vs. placebo. All flibanserin regimens improved FSDS-R total, FSDS-R Item 13, FSFI total, and FSFI desire domain scores vs. placebo (P<0.05, for all). More women receiving flibanserin 50 mg twice daily and 100 mg once daily considered their HSDD to have improved than women receiving placebo (44.1% and 47.0% vs. 30.3%, respectively) (P<0.000, 1 vs. placebo). The most frequently reported adverse events in women receiving flibanserin were somnolence (11.8%), dizziness (10.5%), and fatigue (10.3%). CONCLUSION: In premenopausal women with HSDD, flibanserin 100 mg once daily was well tolerated and associated with statistically significant improvements in SSE, sexual desire (FSFI desire domain score but not eDiary desire score), sexual function, and decrease in sexual distress vs. placebo.

Treatment of hypoactive sexual desire disorder in premenopausal women: efficacy of flibanserin in the VIOLET Study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) is the most common form of female sexual dysfunction and is characterized by low sexual desire that causes distress. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of flibanserin, a postsynaptic 5-HT(1A) agonist/5-HT(2A) antagonist, in premenopausal women with HSDD. METHODS: North American premenopausal women with HSDD were randomized to 24 weeks' treatment with placebo (N = 295), flibanserin 50 mg (N = 295), or flibanserin 100 mg (N = 290), once daily at bedtime. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Coprimary endpoints were change from baseline to study end in number of satisfying sexual events (SSE) and sexual desire score measured daily using an electronic diary (eDiary). Secondary endpoints included change from baseline to study end in female sexual function index (FSFI) desire domain and total scores, female sexual distress scale-revised (FSDS-R) Item 13 and total scores, and patient's global impression of improvement. RESULTS: Flibanserin 50 mg and 100 mg led to increases in SSE (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01 vs. placebo, respectively). There was a numerical trend toward improvement in eDiary desire score on flibanserin 100 mg, but statistical significance was not reached (P = 0.07 vs. placebo). FSFI desire domain and total scores increased with both flibanserin regimens (P < 0.05). FSDS-R total and Item 13 scores decreased with flibanserin 100 mg (P < 0.001), indicating reduced sexual distress. More women receiving flibanserin 50 mg and 100 mg considered their HSDD to have improved than women receiving placebo (39.6% and 50.0% vs. 30.3%, respectively) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: In premenopausal women with HSDD, flibanserin 50 mg and 100 mg once daily at bedtime were well tolerated and associated with statistically significant improvements in SSE, sexual desire (FSFI desire domain score but not eDiary desire score) and overall sexual function, and reduction of sexual distress, vs. placebo.

Does the Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised cover the feelings of women with HSDD?

INTRODUCTION: Distress associated with low sexual desire is a key feature of hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD). Accurate, reliable, and easy-to-use diagnostic tools to measure such distress are required. The Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised (FSDS-R) has been shown to have good discriminant validity, test-retest reliability, and internal consistency in measuring sex-related personal distress in women with HSDD. However, the content validity (relevance, clarity, comprehensiveness) of the scale must also be established. AIM: The aim of this study was to assess the content validity of the FSDS-R and to examine the potential of Item 13 as a stand-alone measure of distress associated with decreased sexual desire. METHODS: A single-visit content validation study was conducted in three centers in the United States. Women were screened for HSDD; those with HSDD completed the FSDS-R and then underwent debriefing to capture information on their perceptions of the instrument. Participants also rated the relevancy of every FSDS-R item, from 0 ("not at all relevant") to 4 ("extremely relevant"). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Female HSDD patients' ratings of the relevance and ease of understanding of the 13 items of the FSDS-R. RESULTS: Twenty-five women with HSDD were interviewed. Mean relevancy ratings ranged from 1.96 (Item 9) to 3.33 (Item 13). Most participants (76-100%) found every item clear and easy to understand. Item 13 alone demonstrated good content validity, and 56% of participants felt that it covered all of their feelings about their low sexual desire. CONCLUSIONS: This study established the content validity of the FSDS-R and demonstrated that the FSDS-R total score is a relevant endpoint for women with HSDD. The tool's one item specific to low sexual desire (Item 13) was given the highest score and highest relevancy of all items, and over half the sample felt that it covered all of their feelings about their low sexual desire.

FDA Decisions on Measures of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in Women: A History, With Grounds to Consider Clinical Judgment.

INTRODUCTION: In 2000, the FDA began issuing advice about treatments for hypoactive sexual desire disorder (HSDD) in women. How its recommendations have evolved has not been reviewed. Its consistent preference for self-rating by patients over evaluation by an examining clinician has not been addressed. OBJECTIVES: Recount the changes in FDA's proposals about patient-reported outcomes and diagnostics. Compare the value of patient-reported measures and clinical interviews. METHODS: Historical review is based on draft guidances, publications, meetings, and prescribing information. RESULTS: The FDA has avoided clinician input into diagnosis and evaluation of the severity of HSDD in women. It abandoned its initial (2000) insistence on counts of satisfying sexual events to define efficacy in favor of symptom-related scales to evaluate desire and distress with daily self-ratings. By 2015, the FDA accepted the self-rated Female Sexual Function Index-Desire Domain (FSFI-D) to measure desire and the most relevant item of the Female Sexual Distress Scale-Revised (FSDS-R) to measure distress; retrospection for both is one month. The FDA rejected the one clinician-rated broad measure of HSDD, the Sexual Interest and Desire Inventory (SIDI-F), although well-validated and treatment-sensitive. Since 2005, the FDA has accepted the Decreased Sexual Desire Screener (DSDS) to diagnose HSDD by non-expert clinicians using self-ratings and exploring them in more depth in a clinical interview. CONCLUSION: FDA's decisions on how to measure HSDD in women may have stabilized on accepting 2 co-primary measures: the FSFI-D and the FSDS-R item on bother about low desire, and on accepting the DSDS for diagnosis. FDA's rejection of clinician ratings of severity through interviews in clinical trials seems unsound because interviews can give broader assessments than (brief) self-ratings, although the agency's logic was to avoid diagnostic controversies and help avoid overcommercialization. Semistructured clinical interviews for diagnosis (DSDS) and severity-rating (SIDI-F) are well validated and are recommended for clinical practice. Pyke RE. FDA Decisions on Measures of Hypoactive Sexual Desire Disorder in Women: A History, With Grounds to Consider Clinical Judgment. Sex Med Rev 2021;9:186-193.