A cross-validation of the provisional diagnostic instrument (PDI-4).

BACKGROUND: The Provisional Diagnostic Instrument (PDI-4) is a brief, adult self-report instrument for 4 common psychiatric diagnoses in primary care patients: major depressive episode (MDE), generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), and bipolar I disorder based on past or present mania. Our objective was to assess validity of the PDI-4 in a population independent of the study population originally used to develop the scale. METHODS: An online version of the 17-item PDI-4 was administered to 1,047 adults in the US; respondents also completed the PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ within the online survey. Respondents self-reported diagnosis by a healthcare professional with the terms depression (n=221), anxiety (n=218), attention deficit disorder (n=206), bipolar or manic depressive disorder (n=195), or none of these (n=207). Statistical analyses examined convergent and discriminant validity, and operating characteristics of the PDI-4 relative to the individual, validated, self-rated scales PHQ-9, HADS-A, CAARS-S, and MDQ, for each PDI-4 diagnosis. RESULTS: Convergent validity of the PDI-4 was supported by strong correlations with the corresponding individual scales (range of 0.63 [PDI-4 and MDQ] to 0.87 [PDI-4 and PHQ-9]). Operating characteristics of the PDI-4 were similar to results in the previous site-based study. The scale exhibited moderate sensitivities (0.52 [mania] to 0.70 [ADHD]) and strong specificities (0.86 [mania] to 0.92 [GAD]) using the individual scales as the gold standards. ANOVAs demonstrated that PDI-4 discriminated between subsets of patients defined by pre-specified severity level cutoff scores of the individual scales. However, overlapping symptoms and co-morbidities made differentiation between mental diagnoses much weaker than differentiation from the control group with none of the diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS: The PDI-4 appears to be a suitable, brief, self-rated tool for provisional diagnoses of common mental disorders. However, the high level of symptom overlap between these diagnoses emphasizes that such brief scales are not a replacement for thorough diagnostic evaluation by trained medical providers.

A provisional screening instrument for four common mental disorders in adult primary care patients.

OBJECTIVE: To develop an adult self-report instrument for provisional diagnosis of four common mental disorders in primary care patients. METHODS: Primary care patients were evaluated during routine clinic visits with a self-report screening tool comprised of 85 DSM-IV symptom-based candidate questions. Patients with a physician-assessed provisional diagnosis for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), major depressive episode (MDE), past/present mania, and adult attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), or none of these, completed additional self-report clinical questionnaires, and then were interviewed on the telephone by a trained rater for a SCID/ACDS diagnosis. Responses to the symptom-based candidate questions were used to calculate sensitivity and specificity for a SCID/ACDS diagnosis (GAD, N = 24; MDE, N = 89; Mania, N = 24; ADHD, N = 65) and to select the optimal four questions for each diagnosis to be included in the instrument. RESULTS: Analyses resulted in a 17-item instrument for provisional differential diagnosis of GAD, MDE, past/present mania, and ADHD. Comparison of limited symptom-based versus full DSM-IV criteria-based diagnosis showed minimal differences for relative diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivities and specificities, respectively, were 83% and 75% for GAD, 80% and 80% for MDE, 83% and 82% for mania, and 82%and 73% for ADHD. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this preliminary work, the Provisional Diagnostic Instrument-4 is a brief, easily scored, self-report instrument that may assist primary care physicians to identify potential cases of GAD, MDE, past/present mania, and ADHD.

Association of catechol-O-methyltransferase variants with duloxetine response in major depressive disorder.

Single-nucleotide and diplotype associations with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD(17)) total score changes were examined, based on catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) rs165599 status in duloxetine-treated, self-identified white patients with major depressive disorder. COMT rs165737 and a diplotype containing COMT rs165599 and COMT rs165737 were associated with HAMD(17) total score changes.

Genetic associations of prolactin increase in olanzapine/fluoxetine combination-treated patients.

In patients from two clinical trials, we investigated the associations of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes with prolactin level changes during treatment with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination. In both cohorts, three dopamine receptor D2 (DRD2) SNPs were associated with prolactin changes. DRD2 may influence susceptibility to hyperprolactinemia associated with antipsychotic treatment.

Olanzapine/fluoxetine combination vs. lamotrigine in the 6-month treatment of bipolar I depression.

To determine the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) compared with lamotrigine (Lam) for long-term treatment of bipolar I depression, this 25-wk, randomized, double-blind study compared OFC (6/25, 6/50, 12/25, or 12/50 mg/d, n=205) with Lam titrated to 200 mg/d (n=205) in patients with bipolar I disorder, depressed. A protocol-specified analysis of 7-wk outcomes was previously reported. Outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) (primary), Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores. OFC-treated patients had significantly greater improvement than Lam-treated patients over 25 wk on CGI-S (p=0.008), MADRS (p=0.005), and YMRS (p<0.001) scores, and from baseline across visits from week 5 (titration complete) to the end of the study on CGI-S (p=0.043), MADRS (p=0.017), and YMRS (p=0.001) scores. Of patients in remission after the 7-wk acute phase, there was no significant difference between treatment groups in the incidence of relapse (MADRS >15, p=0.528). Rate of treatment-emergent mania was not significantly different by treatment (p=0.401). OFC-treated patients had more frequent (p<0.05) somnolence, increased appetite, dry mouth, sedation, weight gain, and tremor; Lam-treated patients had more frequent insomnia. There was a significant difference in incidence of treatment-emergent cholesterol > or = 240 (p<0.001) and in weight gain of > or = 7% (p<0.001) in favour of the Lam group. Patients with bipolar I depression had significantly greater symptom improvement over 25 wk on OFC compared with Lam. There was no treatment difference in incidence of relapse. OFC-treated patients had more treatment-emergent adverse events and greater incidence of weight gain and hypercholesterolaemia.

Defining "good" and "poor" outcomes in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder: a multidimensional data-driven approach.

The study's goal was to characterize the typology of patient outcomes based on social and occupational functioning and psychiatric symptoms following antipsychotic drug treatment, and to explore predictors of group membership representing the best/worst outcomes. A hierarchical cluster analysis was used to define groups of patients (n=1449) based on endpoint values for psychiatric symptoms, social functioning, and useful work measured up to 30 weeks of treatment. Stepwise logistic regression was used to construct predictive models of cluster membership for baseline predictors, and with 2/4/8 weeks of treatment. Five distinct clusters of patients were identified at endpoint (Clusters A-E). Patients in Cluster A (25.6%, best outcome) had minimal psychiatric symptoms and mild functional impairment, while patients in Cluster D (14.3%) and E (14.8%) (worst outcome) had moderate-to-severe symptoms and severe functional impairment. Occupational functioning, disorganized thinking, and positive symptoms were sufficient to describe the clusters. Membership in the best/worst clusters was predicted by baseline scores for functioning and symptom severity, and by early changes in symptoms with treatment. Psychiatric symptoms and functioning provided complementary information to describe treatment outcomes. Early symptom response significantly improved the prediction of outcome, suggesting that early monitoring of treatment response may be useful in clinical practice.

Identifying patterns in treatment response profiles in acute bipolar mania: a cluster analysis approach.

UNLABELLED: Patients with acute mania respond differentially to treatment and, in many cases, fail to obtain or sustain symptom remission. The objective of this exploratory analysis was to characterize response in bipolar disorder by identifying groups of patients with similar manic symptom response profiles. METHODS: Patients (n = 222) were selected from a randomized, double-blind study of treatment with olanzapine or divalproex in bipolar I disorder, manic or mixed episode, with or without psychotic features. Hierarchical clustering based on Ward's distance was used to identify groups of patients based on Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores at each of 5 assessments over 7 weeks. Logistic regression was used to identify baseline predictors for clusters of interest. RESULTS: Four distinct clusters of patients were identified: Cluster 1 (n = 64): patients did not maintain a response (YMRS total scores < or = 12); Cluster 2 (n = 92): patients responded rapidly (within less than a week) and response was maintained; Cluster 3 (n = 36): patients responded rapidly but relapsed soon afterwards (YMRS > or = 15); Cluster 4 (n = 30): patients responded slowly (> or = 2 weeks) and response was maintained. Predictive models using baseline variables found YMRS Item 10 (Appearance), and psychosis to be significant predictors for Clusters 1 and 4 vs. Clusters 2 and 3, but none of the baseline characteristics allowed discriminating between Clusters 1 vs. 4. Experiencing a mixed episode at baseline predicted membership in Clusters 2 and 3 vs. Clusters 1 and 4. Treatment with divalproex, larger number of previous manic episodes, lack of disruptive-aggressive behavior, and more prominent depressive symptoms at baseline were predictors for Cluster 3 vs. 2. CONCLUSION: Distinct treatment response profiles can be predicted by clinical features at baseline. The presence of these features as potential risk factors for relapse in patients who have responded to treatment should be considered prior to discharge. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The clinical trial cited in this report has not been registered because it was conducted and completed prior to the inception of clinical trial registries.

Evaluating dose response from flexible dose clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: The true dose effect in flexible-dose clinical trials may be obscured and even reversed because dose and outcome are related. METHODS: To evaluate dose effect in response on primary efficacy scales from 2 randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose trials of patients with bipolar mania who received olanzapine (N = 234, 5-20 mg/day), or patients with schizophrenia who received olanzapine (N = 172, 10-20 mg/day), we used marginal structural models, inverse probability of treatment weighting (MSM, IPTW) methodology. Dose profiles for mean changes from baseline were evaluated using weighted MSM with a repeated measures model. To adjust for selection bias due to non-random dose assignment and dropouts, patient-specific time-dependent weights were determined as products of (i) stable weights based on inverse probability of receiving the sequence of dose assignments that was actually received by a patient up to given time multiplied by (ii) stable weights based on inverse probability of patient remaining on treatment by that time. Results were compared with those by unweighted analyses. RESULTS: While the observed difference in efficacy scores for dose groups for the unweighted analysis strongly favored lower doses, the weighted analyses showed no strong dose effects and, in some cases, reversed the apparent "negative dose effect." CONCLUSION: While naïve comparison of groups by last or modal dose in a flexible-dose trial may result in severely biased efficacy analyses, the MSM with IPTW estimators approach may be a valuable method of removing these biases and evaluating potential dose effect, which may prove useful for planning confirmatory trials.

Dopamine receptor D3 genotype association with greater acute positive symptom remission with olanzapine therapy in predominately caucasian patients with chronic schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To test association of dopamine receptor D3 (DRD-3) gene polymorphisms with olanzapine response in genetic samples from a registration phase clinical trial. METHODS: Eighty-eight acutely ill patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were genotyped for ser-9-gly (rs6280) and 23 other polymorphisms within the DRD-3 gene. Allelic association of clinical response (mean baseline- to-endpoint reduction in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total and subscores) over 6 weeks of olanzapine treatment was assessed using repeated measures analysis of variance. RESULTS: Ser-9-gly genotypes were associated with differences in PANSS total score improvement from baseline to 6 weeks (p = 0.021). This association was most notable for improvement in positive symptoms (p = 0.0001), with patients with gly/gly genotype significantly more responsive. More patients with the gly/gly genotype had greater positive symptom remission (endpoint rating of minimal or none on all PANSS positive items, 39.1%) compared with patients with gly/ser and ser/ser genotypes (13.8%; p = 0.033). DRD-3 polymorphisms in disequilibrium with ser-9-gly were also significantly associated with greater positive symptom improvement (p = 0.0009-0.021), and one not in complete linkage disequilibrium, with lesser improvement (p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Gly/gly DRD-3 genotype predicted statistically and clinically significantly better acute positive symptom reduction compared with other ser-9-gly genotypes in patients treated with olanzapine.

Initial symptoms of manic relapse in manic or mixed-manic bipolar disorder: post hoc analysis of patients treated with olanzapine or lithium.

UNLABELLED: A post hoc analysis of Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) item scores was conducted to identify symptoms that may predict impending relapse using prospectively collected data from a double-blind, randomized relapse prevention study of patients treated with olanzapine (N=200, 5-20 mg/d) versus lithium (N=201, 300-1800 mg/d). METHODS: Relapses (YMRS > or = 15, or hospitalization) included in this analysis occurred 3-52 weeks after randomization. Repeated measures logistic regression of increases (> or = 1) in YMRS item scores prior to the visit that preceded relapse was used to estimate the odds of relapse. RESULTS: A total of 31 patients relapsed during the first 3-16 weeks of the study (olanzapine, n=12; lithium, n=19). YMRS items that increased most frequently within a 2-week period preceding relapse were (olanzapine vs. lithium, respectively): increased motor activity/energy (58.3%, 21.1%), irritability (33.3%, 31.6%), decreased need for sleep (25.0%, 10.5%), increased speech (25.0%, 10.5%), and elevated mood (25.0%, 15.8%). YMRS items with significant odds ratios (OR) that predicted relapse in patients treated with olanzapine or lithium, respectively, were: increased motor activity/energy (OR, 35.7; OR, 7.8), irritability (OR, 9.5; OR, 7.8), elevated mood (OR, 8.1; OR, 4.2), and increased sexual interest (OR, 13.7; OR, 7.7). CONCLUSIONS: Early recognition of symptom exacerbation in bipolar mania, particularly increased motor activity-energy may permit clinical interventions to help avert relapse.

Differential antidepressant symptom efficacy: placebo-controlled comparisons of duloxetine and SSRIs (fluoxetine, paroxetine, escitalopram).

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), the response for specific Hamilton Depression Rating Scale items will differ for duloxetine compared with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) and that patterns of response will differ based on symptom severity at baseline. METHOD: Data were pooled from all Lilly-sponsored clinical trials where duloxetine was compared with placebo and an SSRI in patients with MDD: 7 randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose, 8-week studies of duloxetine (n = 1,133) versus SSRI (n = 689) versus placebo (n = 641). Duloxetine doses were 40, 60, 80 and 120 mg/day. SSRI doses were 10 mg/day (escitalopram) and 20 mg/day (fluoxetine and paroxetine). RESULTS: Compared to SSRI-treated patients, duloxetine-treated patients had a significantly greater (p < or = 0.05) reduction in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) total score and HAMD17 items of work and activities, psychomotor retardation, genital symptoms and hypochondriasis. Differences favoring the SSRIs approached significance for middle insomnia (p = 0.057) and late insomnia (p = 0.06), with effect sizes at least twice the magnitude of the corresponding effect sizes for duloxetine. Similarly, the advantage for duloxetine versus the SSRIs approached significance for general somatic symptoms (p = 0.056), with an effect size twice that observed for the SSRIs. The HAMD17 total score difference was driven mostly by patients with lower baseline MDD severity (HAMD17 total score < or = 19), where the HAMD17 effect size advantage for duloxetine over combined SSRIs was statistically significant (p = 0.031). CONCLUSION: Potentially important differences in symptom response patterns were found between duloxetine and the combined SSRIs depending on symptom severity, and different HAMD17 items responded differently to duloxetine compared with SSRIs. Understanding these differences may be useful in tailoring antidepressant therapy for individual patients.

Reduced suicidal ideation in bipolar I disorder mixed-episode patients in a placebo-controlled trial of olanzapine combined with lithium or divalproex.

OBJECTIVE: To identify symptoms associated with suicidality in bipolar I disorder patients, and to assess suicide risk during treatment with olan-zapine in combination with lithium or divalproex. METHOD: We used data from a study (conducted from September 1997 to October 2000) in which DSM-IV bipolar I manic or mixed-episode patients who were partially responsive to at least 2 weeks of lithium or dival-proex monotherapy prior to study entry were randomly assigned to augmentation therapy with olanzapine (5-20 mg/day) or placebo. Among mixed-episode patients with residual suicidality (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-item 3 [HAM-D-3] score of 1 or above) at randomization to cotherapy, we identified items in the Young Mania Rating Scale, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale, and Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale that correlated with HAM-D-3 scores. We used factor analysis of correlated items to identify symptom domains associated with suicidality ratings and assessed changes in symptom factors and HAM-D-3 scores during 6 weeks of combination therapy with olanzapine versus placebo. RESULTS: In 58 mixed-episode patients, mean +/- SD HAM-D-3 scores averaged 1.36 +/- 0.55 after at least 2 weeks of initial mood stabilizer monotherapy prior to study entry. Factors associated with the HAM-D-3 appeared to represent somatic discomfort, agitated depression, and psychotic features. Combination therapy with olanzapine (N = 36) versus placebo (N = 22) differentially reduced HAM-D-3 scores by 58% versus 29% (p < .05) within 1 week, and all 3 associated symptom factors within 2 weeks by averages of 31% versus 12% (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Suicidality in adult, mixed-episode, bipolar I disorder patients was associated with somatic discomfort, agitated depression, and psychosis. Overall, these findings suggest that the addition of an atypical antipsychotic-antimanic agent in some bipolar disorder patients may help to reduce suicidal ideation.

Differential efficacy of olanzapine and lithium in preventing manic or mixed recurrence in patients with bipolar I disorder based on number of previous manic or mixed episodes.

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder outcome worsens as number of manic episodes increases, suggesting that prevention of recurrent episodes early during the disorder could improve patient prognosis. We investigated treatment efficacy in prevention of mood episodes in patients subgrouped by number of prior manic episodes. METHOD: This study was a post hoc analysis of data from a multicenter, double-blind, 12-month clinical trial of relapse/recurrence in 431 initially euthymic patients with at least 2 prior manic/ mixed episodes and a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar I disorder randomly assigned to olanzapine (5-20 mg/day) or lithium (serum concentration 0.6 to 1.2 mEq/L). Data were collected between August 1999 and June 2002. Patients were subcategorized by illness stage according to number of prior manic/mixed episodes-early stage: 2 prior episodes (N = 53, lithium; N = 48, olanzapine), intermediate stage: 3 to 5 prior episodes (N = 80, lithium; N = 98, olanzapine), and later stage: more than 5 prior episodes (N = 81, lithium; N = 71, olanzapine)-and were evaluated for rates of relapse/recurrence. RESULTS: There were significant effects for treatment (p < .001) and illness stage (p = .006) but no significant interaction (p = .107) on rate of manic/mixed relapse/recurrence. Rates of manic/ mixed relapse/recurrence for olanzapine versus lithium were 2.1% versus 26.4% (p = .008), 13.3% versus 23.8% (p = .073), and 23.9% versus 33.3% (p = .204) for early-, intermediate-, and later-stage groups, respectively. There was no significant effect for treatment (p = .096) or illness stage (p = .731) for depressive relapse/recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Early-stage (but not intermediate-or later-stage) patients had a significantly lower rate of relapse/recurrence of manic/mixed episodes with olanzapine compared to lithium. Thus, olanzapine maintenance therapy may be particularly effective early in the course of bipolar illness.

A post hoc analysis of transitioning to oral treatment with olanzapine or haloperidol after 24-hour intramuscular treatment in acutely agitated adult patients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia might require treatment with IM antipsychotics, followed by a transition to oral medication. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the relationship between 24-hour IM and transitional oral dosages of 2 antipsychotic medications, olanzapine and haloperidol. METHODS: This post hoc analysis used data from a multinational, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study comparing the efficacy of olanzapine, haloperidol, and placebo in acutely agitated inpatients aged > or =18 years with schizophrenia conducted at hospitals in 13 countries. Patients received 1 to 3 IM injections of olanzapine 10 mg or haloperidol 7.5 mg over 24 hours (IM phase), followed by 4 days of oral treatment with 5 to 20 mg/d of either antipsychotic (oral phase). Study patients were grouped according to which drug they received, and subgrouped based on whether they received a single or multiple IM injections. Rates of transition to lower (5-10 mg/d) versus higher (15-20 mg/d) dosages were compared within and between treatments. RESULTS: Data from 236 patients were analyzed (olanzapine, 121 patients [76 men, 45 women; mean (SD) age, 38.4 (12.2) years; mean (SD) weight, 74.9 (18.5) kg]; haloperidol, 115 patients [80 men, 35 women; mean (SD) age, 38.0 (10.2) years; mean (SD) weight, 75.4 (18.7) kg]). At the end of the IM phase, the rate of haloperidol patients who were transitioned to lower oral doses was significantly higher in the single-injection subgroup compared with the multiple-injection subgroup (P = 0.03); this difference was not found in the group receiving olanzapine. At day 4 of oral treatment, the rates of patients in the olanzapine and haloperidol groups who were transitioned to higher oral doses were significantly higher in the single-injection subgroups compared with the multiple-injection subgroups (P = 0.002 and =0.003, respectively). CONCLUSION: In this study, the proportion of agitated patients with schizophrenia who transitioned to higher dosages (15-20 mg) of olanzapine or haloperidol by day 4 of the oral switch was significantly greater in patients who were previously treated with a single IM injection of olanzapine (10 mg) or haloperidol (7.5 mg).right.

Onset and early behavioral effects of pharmacologically different antidepressants and placebo in depression.

This study was aimed at resolving the time course of clinical action of antidepressants (ADs) and the type of early behavioral changes that precede recovery in treatment-responsive depressed patients. The first goal was to identify, during the first 2 weeks of treatment, the onset of clinical actions of the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), paroxetine, and the selective noradrenergic reuptake inhibitor, desipramine (DMI). The second aim was to test the hypothesis that the two pharmacologic subtypes would induce different early behavioral changes in treatment-responsive patients. The design was a randomized, parallel group, placebo-controlled, double-blind study for 6 weeks of treatment following a 1-week washout period. The study utilized measures of the major behavioral components of the depressive disorder as well as overall severity. The results indicated that the onset of clinical actions of DMI ranged from 3 to 13 days, averaged 13 days for paroxetine, and was 16-42 days for placebo. Furthermore, as hypothesized, the different types of ADs initially impacted different behavioral aspects of the disorder. After 1 week of treatment, DMI produced greater reductions in motor retardation and depressed mood than did paroxetine and placebo, and this difference persisted at the second week of treatment. Early improvement in depressed mood-motor retardation differentiated patients who responded to DMI after 6 weeks of treatment from those that did not. Paroxetine initially reduced anxiety more in responders than in nonresponders, and by the second week, significantly improved depressed mood and distressed expression in responders to a greater extent. Depressed patients who responded to placebo showed no consistent early pattern of behavior improvement. Early drug-specific behavioral changes were highly predictive of ultimate clinical response to the different ADs, results that could eventually be applied directly to clinical practice.

Reduction of platelet serotonin content in depressed patients treated with either paroxetine or desipramine.

Drugs thought to be selective inhibitors of either the uptake of serotonin (5-HT) or norepinephrine (NE) are known to be effective antidepressants. In general, a relative selectivity for NE vs. 5-HT uptake inhibition greater than 50-fold in vitro is thought to be sufficient to maintain such selectivity in vivo. To explore this issue, we carried out a study in which depressed patients were treated with either the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) paroxetine or the selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) desipramine. Patients were treated with either drug or placebo for 6 wk. Drug levels in plasma and platelet 5-HT content were measured 12 times during the treatment period using HPLC procedures. Both drug treatments caused a significant reduction of platelet 5-HT content. Paroxetine reduced platelet 5-HT content to approx. 1% of pretreatment levels (n = 3). The inhibition of 5-HT uptake by paroxetine appeared to be immediate and complete. Desipramine reduced platelet 5-HT content to 38.7+/-6.2 % of pretreatment levels (n = 5) at a mean plasma level of 195 ng/ml. The percent reduction of platelet 5-HT content after 6 wk of drug treatment was proportional to the steady state plasma level of desipramine. The IC50 value of desipramine to reduce platelet 5-HT was 135 ng/ml. These results demonstrate that therapeutic concentrations of the SNRI desipramine as well as the SSRI paroxetine inhibited serotonin uptake in platelets of depressed patients. If such effects occur in the brain, desipramine might have some component of its therapeutic effects due to actions on the uptake of 5-HT.

Association of common variations in the norepinephrine transporter gene with response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination versus continued-fluoxetine treatment in patients with treatment-resistant depression: a candidate gene analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in candidate genes are associated with response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. METHOD: A post hoc analysis of a priori-selected SNPs used data from a clinical trial (dates: April 2002-July 2005) of olanzapine-fluoxetine combination, fluoxetine, and olanzapine in patients with major depressive disorder (DSM-IV criteria) and with nonresponse to prestudy antidepressant treatment and nonresponse to fluoxetine treatment during the study. Patients received open-label treatment with fluoxetine for 8 weeks (2 weeks, 25 mg/d; then 6 weeks, 50 mg/d), at the end of which nonresponders (< 25% decline in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale score) were randomized to receive double-blind, monotherapy treatment with olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (6/50-18/50 mg/d, n = 71), fluoxetine (50 mg/d, n = 78), or olanzapine (6-18 mg/d, n = 56) for 8 weeks. Statistical significance was assessed at P < .05. The primary efficacy measure for within-study treatment was improvement on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). RESULTS: Rs36024, an intronic SNP in the norepinephrine transporter (SLC6A2), as well as 3 SNPs in melanocortin 3 receptor (MC3R) and 2 SNPs in tryptophan hydroxylase 2 (TPH2), were associated with MADRS-defined response to treatment with olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (adjusted Li-Nyholt P < .05). Except for 1 SNP in TPH2, identified SNPs were not significantly associated with response to continued-fluoxetine or olanzapine treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings further support the hypothesis that the synergistic effect of olanzapine and fluoxetine on prefrontal cortical levels of norepinephrine and dopamine might be an underlying mechanism for the efficacy of olanzapine-fluoxetine combination in the treatment of treatment-resistant depression and, if replicated, may form a basis on which response to olanzapine-fluoxetine combination versus continued fluoxetine can be predicted based on variants in SLC6A2. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Parent study registered at ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00035321.

Evaluation of genetic models for response in a randomized clinical trial of duloxetine in major depressive disorder.

In self-identified white patients with major depressive disorder (N=126) treated with open-label duloxetine (60-120 mg/d), a significant association of (P=0.020) of a composite risk score (based on SLC6A2 rs5569 [G1287A] AA, HTR1A rs6295 [C(-1019)G] GG, and COMT rs174697 AA/AG) with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale total score change from baseline to 12 weeks was observed.

Analysis of gene variants previously associated with iloperidone response in patients with schizophrenia who are treated with risperidone.

OBJECTIVE: We examined 6 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) previously reported to be associated with response to iloperidone therapy for association with response to risperidone therapy. METHOD: Patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV) were assessed during 2006 and 2007 for response/nonresponse (defined as ≥ 20%/<20% improvement in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] total score) after 2 weeks of risperidone treatment (2 to 6 mg/d). Responders continued risperidone treatment; nonresponders were randomly assigned to either risperidone or olanzapine treatment (10 to 20 mg/d) for an additional 10 weeks. Associations between change in PANSS total (primary outcome measure), positive, and negative scores and the 6 SNPs were examined in risperidone-treated patients (N = 145). Genotype frequencies and improvement in PANSS total scores were analyzed for those SNPs significantly associated with change in PANSS total score. RESULTS: The SNPs XKR4 rs9643483 and GRIA4 rs2513265 were significantly associated with change in PANSS total response (adjusted P < .05 for both), with the same direction of effect as reported for iloperidone. For patients with nonresponsive genotypes for these SNPs, mean improvement in PANSS total score for African Americans was two-thirds that seen for whites (XKR4: -13.9 versus -21.4; GRIA4: -12.5 versus -20.9). CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective pharmacogenomic analysis, we found that 2 SNPs previously linked to iloperidone response were also associated with response to risperidone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00337662.

Pharmacogenomic associations with weight gain in olanzapine treatment of patients without schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: Pharmacogenomic analyses of weight gain during treatment with second-generation antipsychotics have resulted in a number of associations with variants in ankyrin repeat and kinase domain containing 1 (ANKK1)/dopamine D2 receptor (DRD2) and serotonin 2C receptor (HTR2C) genes. These studies primarily assessed subjects with schizophrenia who had prior antipsychotic exposure that may have influenced the amount of weight gained from subsequent therapies. We assessed the relationships between single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in these genes with weight gain during treatment with olanzapine in a predominantly antipsychotic-naive population. METHOD: The association between 5 ANKK1, 54 DRD2, and 11 HTR2C SNPs and weight change during 8 weeks of olanzapine treatment was assessed in 4 pooled studies of 205 white patients with diagnoses other than schizophrenia who were generally likely to have had limited previous antipsychotic exposure. RESULTS: The A allele of DRD2 rs2440390(A/G) was associated with greater weight gain in the entire study sample (P = .0473). Three HTR2C SNPs in strong linkage disequilibrium, rs6318, rs2497538, and rs1414334, were associated with greater weight gain in women but not in men (P = .0032, .0012, and .0031, respectively). A significant association with weight gain for 2 HTR2C SNPs previously reported associated with weight gain, -759C/T (rs3813929) and -697G/C (rs518147), was not found. CONCLUSIONS: Associations between weight gain and HTR2C and DRD2 variants in whites newly exposed to olanzapine may present opportunities for the individualization of medication selection and development based on differences in adverse events observed across genotype groups.