Asenapine for the treatment of adults with an acute exacerbation of schizophrenia: results from a randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose, placebo-controlled trial with olanzapine as an active control.

OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the efficacy and safety of asenapine 2.5 mg twice daily (bid; n=97) or 5 mg bid (n=113) versus placebo (n=101) in adults with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. METHODS: Adults with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) schizophrenia diagnosis were randomized to asenapine 2.5 mg bid, 5 mg bid, placebo, or olanzapine 15 mg once daily. The primary objective was to test superiority of asenapine versus placebo as measured by the change from baseline to day 42 in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score. The key safety objective was to evaluate weight change in asenapine versus olanzapine at day 42. RESULTS: The primary efficacy endpoint was met; the difference in least squares mean change from baseline to day 42 in PANSS total score between asenapine 5 mg bid and placebo was -5.5 points (unadjusted 95% CI: -10.1, -1.0; multiplicity adjusted P=0.0356). Neither asenapine 2.5 mg bid nor olanzapine 15mg were superior to placebo. Both asenapine groups demonstrated significantly less weight gain than olanzapine at day 42. Significantly higher incidences of oral hypoesthesia and dysgeusia (combined) for asenapine 2.5 mg bid (5.2% vs 0.0%; P=0.0217) and 5 mg bid (7.1% vs 0.0%; P=0.0033) were observed versus placebo. There were no significant differences between asenapine and placebo for insomnia, extrapyramidal symptoms, akathisia, dizziness, or combination of somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia. CONCLUSION: This study supports previous efficacy and safety findings of asenapine; asenapine 5 mg bid is the lowest effective dose in adults with schizophrenia. Asenapine was associated with significantly less weight gain than olanzapine at day 42.

Efficacy and tolerability of an mGlu2/3 agonist in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder.

LY354740, a potent and selective mGlu (metabotropic glutamate receptor)2/3 agonist, has shown efficacy in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). LY544344 is a LY354740 prodrug that increases LY354740 bioavailability. This 8-week study was designed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LY544344 in the treatment of GAD. Participants had a diagnoses of GAD, baseline Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale anxiety subscale scores > or = 10, and moderate illness severity. Patients were randomized to double-blind treatment with LY544344 16 mg b.i.d. (n = 28), LY544344 8 mg b.i.d. (n = 36), or placebo (n = 44). LY544344 16 mg b.i.d.-treated patients showed significantly greater improvement from baseline in Hamilton Anxiety and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement scores, as well as response and remission rates compared with placebo-treated patients. LY544344 was well tolerated and there were no significant differences in the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events among the three treatment groups. However, the trial was discontinued early based on findings of convulsions in preclinical studies. In conclusion, the findings of this study support the potential efficacy of mGlu2/3 receptor agonist agents in the treatment of GAD. Additional studies will be needed to further assess the toxicological and clinical profile of LY354740/LY544344.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Asenapine Maintenance Therapy in Adults With an Acute Manic or Mixed Episode Associated With Bipolar I Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The authors determined the efficacy and safety of asenapine in preventing recurrence of any mood episode in adults with bipolar I disorder. METHOD: Adults with an acute manic or mixed episode per DSM-IV-TR criteria were enrolled in this randomized, placebo-controlled trial consisting of an initial 12- to 16-week open-label period and a 26-week double-blind randomized withdrawal period. The target asenapine dosage was 10 mg b.i.d. in the open-label period but could be titrated down to 5 mg b.i.d. After completing the open-label period, subjects meeting stabilization/stable-responder criteria were randomized to asenapine or placebo treatment in the double-blind period. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to recurrence of any mood event during the double-blind period. Kaplan-Meier estimation was performed, and 95% confidence intervals were determined. Safety was assessed throughout. RESULTS: A total of 549 subjects entered the open-label period, of whom 253 enrolled in the double-blind randomized withdrawal period (127 in the placebo group; 126 in the asenapine group). Time to recurrence of any mood episode was statistically significantly longer for asenapine- than placebo-treated subjects. In post hoc analyses, significant differences in favor of asenapine over placebo were seen in time to recurrence of manic and depressive episodes. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were somnolence (10.0%), akathisia (7.7%), and sedation (7.7%) in the open-label period and mania (11.9% of the placebo group compared with 4.0% of the asenapine group) and bipolar I disorder (6.3% compared with 1.6%) in the double-blind period. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term treatment with asenapine was more effective than placebo in preventing recurrence of mood events in adults with bipolar I disorder and was generally well-tolerated.

Effects of asenapine on agitation and hostility in adults with acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of aggression. However, effective management of hostility and/or agitation symptoms may prevent patients from becoming violent. This analysis investigated the efficacy of the antipsychotic asenapine on hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder. METHODS: Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trials of asenapine in adults with manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder (NCT00159744, NCT00159796, and NCT00764478). Post hoc analyses assessed the changes from baseline to day 21 on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility-related item scores in asenapine- or placebo-treated patients with at least minimal or mild symptom severity and on the PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) total score in agitated patients. Changes were adjusted for improvements in overall mania symptoms to investigate direct effects on hostility. RESULTS: Significantly greater changes in favor of asenapine versus placebo were observed in YMRS hostility-related item scores (irritability: least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval] =-0.5 [-0.87, -0.22], P=0.001; disruptive-aggressive behavior: -0.7 [-0.99, -0.37], P<0.0001), PANSS hostility item score (-0.2 [-0.44, -0.04]; P=0.0181), and PANSS-EC total score (-1.4 [-2.4, -0.4]; P=0.0055). Changes in the YMRS disruptive-aggressive behavior score and the sum of the hostility-related items remained significant after adjusting for improvements in other YMRS item scores. CONCLUSION: Asenapine significantly reduced hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder; improvement was at least partially independent of overall improvement on mania symptoms.

Exploring the long-term safety of asenapine in adults with schizophrenia in a double-blind, fixed-dose, extension study.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to assess long-term safety with sublingual asenapine 2.5 or 5 mg twice daily (BID) in patients with schizophrenia. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Actively treated patients on asenapine 2.5 mg BID, asenapine 5 mg BID, or olanzapine 15 mg once daily (QD) who completed a 6-week randomized, double-blind, placebo- and olanzapine-controlled study continued lead-in treatment in this 26-week, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, olanzapine-controlled Phase IIIB extension study; placebo patients were assigned to asenapine 2.5 mg BID treatment. Safety analyses were based on the all treated set (patients who received one or more doses of extension trial medication); change from baseline analyses used the acute study baseline. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and changes in laboratory parameters were monitored; weight change for asenapine versus olanzapine was the key secondary objective. Descriptive statistics were used; weight change was analyzed using a mixed-model repeated-measure approach. RESULTS: Of the 120 patients in the all-treated set, 60% completed treatment (asenapine 2.5 mg BID 66.1% overall, asenapine 5 mg BID 52.4%, olanzapine 15 mg QD 56.3%). The incidence of TEAEs was higher for placebo patients from the lead-in study who switched to asenapine 2.5 mg BID for extension treatment (71.0%) versus patients continuing asenapine 2.5 mg BID (38.7%), asenapine 5 mg BID (38.1%), or olanzapine 15 mg QD (25.0%). The most common TEAE (≥5% in every group) was worsening of schizophrenia. Least squares mean change in body weight from the acute study baseline to week 26 was +0.6 kg for overall asenapine 2.5 mg BID, +0.8 kg for asenapine 5 mg BID, and +1.2 kg for olanzapine 15 mg QD. There were no clinically relevant changes in metabolic parameters; values were generally similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Asenapine 2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID were generally well tolerated in long-term treatment. Weight gain was less for overall asenapine 2.5 mg BID and 5 mg BID than for olanzapine 15 mg QD.

Long-term safety and tolerability of asenapine: A double-blind, uncontrolled, long-term extension trial in adults with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Asenapine (ASN) is approved in the United States as monotherapy and adjunctive therapy (to lithium or valproate) in adults with bipolar mania, and as monotherapy in pediatric patients with bipolar mania. This is the first long-term study evaluating safety and tolerability of ASN fixed doses in this population. METHODS: After completing a 3-week, randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled acute trial, patients could enroll in this 26-week, fixed-dose (5 or 10mg twice daily), double-blind extension study. Select predefined treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and metabolic parameters were reported. RESULTS: Overall, 164 patients were treated; 88 completed the study. The incidence of ≥1 TEAE was greater for PBO/ASN 5mg (68.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (54.7%) and ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (51.0%) with sedation, headache, somnolence, akathisia, and dizziness occurring as the most prevalent TEAEs. Predefined TEAEs were more common for PBO/ASN 5mg (33.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (15.1%) and ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (15.7%). Weight gain (≥7% increase from baseline to endpoint) was more frequent for ASN 10mg/ASN 10mg (16.3%) versus ASN 5mg/ASN 5mg (13.7%) and PBO/ASN 5mg (8.9%). No clinically significant metabolic changes were observed. The incidence of serious AEs was low and primarily related to underlying bipolar I disorder. LIMITATIONS: This study lacked a comparator group and was not powered for direct comparisons of ASN regimens. Results may not be applicable to the general bipolar population. CONCLUSIONS: ASN was generally safe and well tolerated in adults with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder.

Long-term Safety of Asenapine in Pediatric Patients Diagnosed With Bipolar I Disorder: A 50-Week Open-Label, Flexible-Dose Trial.

BACKGROUND: Sublingually administered asenapine was approved in March 2015 by the United States Food and Drug Administration for patients aged 10-17 years with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder (BP-1). This is the first long-term safety and tolerability study of asenapine in this population. METHODS: Following the 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of patients aged 10-17 years with an acute manic or mixed episode associated with BP-1, patients could enroll in this flexible-dose (2.5-10 mg twice daily) open-label extension (OLE) study for an additional 50 weeks, conducted from August 2011 to September 2014 in the United States and Russia. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were assessed and predefined TEAEs of interest reported in addition to metabolic and anthropometric parameters. The Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinical Global Impressions scale in bipolar illness (CGI-BP) were used to assess effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 321 patients (lead-in study treatment: placebo, n = 80; asenapine, n = 241) were included; 267 (83.2 %) reported one or more TEAE and 181 (56.4 %) discontinued early, 48 (15.0 %) due to TEAEs. Of the predefined TEAEs of interest, combined somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia occurred most frequently (42.4 %) followed by oral hypoesthesia/dysgeusia (7.5 %). In total, 109 (34.8 %) patients experienced clinically significant weight gain (≥7 % increase). No clinically meaningful changes were noted for laboratory parameters measured. Eighteen patients met the criteria for new-onset metabolic syndrome (MBS) post-baseline during the extension study, whereas 10 patients who met MBS criteria at baseline did not meet MBS criteria at endpoint. A total of 12 patients met MBS at baseline and endpoint. Mean change in YMRS total score from OLE baseline was -9.2 points at week 50, and change in CGI-BP severity overall score was similar among all treatment groups (those who initially received asenapine and those who initially received placebo). After 26 weeks of treatment in the OLE, 79.2 % of patients were classified as YMRS 50 % responders relative to acute trial baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Asenapine was generally well tolerated in pediatric patients with BP-1 during ≤50 weeks of open-label treatment; among predefined TEAEs of interest, the combination of somnolence/sedation/hypersomnia was the most common. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01349907.

Asenapine: Efficacy and safety of 5 and 10mg bid in a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in adults with a manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder.

BACKGROUND: Asenapine is an atypical antipsychotic for acute treatment of manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder in adults. The recommended asenapine starting dose is 10mg bid with the option to reduce the dose to 5mg bid if needed due to adverse effects/tolerability. METHODS: Phase IIIb, international, double-blind, fixed-dose, parallel-group, 3-week placebo-controlled trial of asenapine 5 and 10mg bid in adults with an acute bipolar I disorder manic or mixed episode. Primary outcome was difference in asenapine versus placebo in mean change from baseline to day 21 in the Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score. Others included difference in asenapine versus placebo in the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Severity (CGI-BP-S) and rate of YMRS responders. RESULTS: Both asenapine doses were statistically superior to placebo in mean change from baseline to day 21 in YMRS total score (-10.9, -14.4, and -14.9 for placebo, asenapine 5mg bid, 10mg bid, respectively). Both asenapine doses had statistically superior improvement in mean change in CGI-BP-S score at day 21. Neither asenapine dose had significantly more YMRS responders at day 21 than placebo. LIMITATIONS: Results may not be generalizable to the entire population with bipolar I disorder owing to strict inclusion criteria. CONCLUSIONS: This study evaluated, by a fixed-dose design, the efficacy and safety of asenapine versus placebo in patients with bipolar I disorder. Both asenapine 5 and 10mg bid were efficacious in treating mania associated with bipolar I disorder and were generally well tolerated.

Asenapine for the Acute Treatment of Pediatric Manic or Mixed Episode of Bipolar I Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate asenapine versus placebo in 403 patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder currently in manic or mixed episodes. METHOD: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, international trial, patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo, asenapine 2.5, 5, or 10 mg b.i.d. (twice daily). Primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score at day 21. Analyses of patients with/without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and with/without stimulant use were performed. RESULTS: The mean difference in asenapine versus placebo in YMRS was -3.2 (p = .0008), -5.3 (p < .001), and -6.2 (p < .001) for asenapine 2.5, 5, and 10 mg b.i.d., respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events with an incidence ≥5% and at least twice placebo were somnolence, sedation, hypoesthesia oral, paresthesia oral, and increased appetite. The asenapine groups had a higher incidence of ≥7% weight gain (range, 8.0%-12.0%) versus placebo (1.1%; p < .05). The mean change from baseline in fasting insulin was larger for patients treated with asenapine than those with placebo (asenapine 2.5 mg b.i.d.: 73.375 pmol/L; asenapine 5 mg b.i.d.: 114.042 pmol/L; asenapine 10 mg b.i.d.: 59.846 pmol/L; placebo: 3.690 pmol/L). The mean changes from baseline for lipid parameters and glucose were also larger in asenapine groups than in the placebo group. No safety differences were observed with respect to ADHD and stimulant use. CONCLUSION: All asenapine doses versus placebo were superior based on change in YMRS at day 21. Asenapine was generally well tolerated in patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder in manic or mixed states. Increases in weight and fasting insulin were associated with asenapine. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of Asenapine Treatment for Pediatric Bipolar Disorder; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01244815.

Safety and Efficacy from an 8 Week Double-Blind Trial and a 26 Week Open-Label Extension of Asenapine in Adolescents with Schizophrenia.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of asenapine in adolescents with schizophrenia. METHODS: In an 8 week, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial, subjects (12-17 years of age) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for schizophrenia were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, asenapine 2.5 mg b.i.d., or asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. Subjects who completed the 8 week acute study could participate in a 26 week flexible-dose asenapine-only open-label extension (OLE). RESULTS: A similar percentage of subjects completed treatment on day 56 (2.5 mg b.i.d. (n=98): 83%; 5 mg b.i.d. [n=106]: 79%; placebo [n=102]: 79%). In the mixed model for repeated measures analysis of the primary end-point (with Hochberg correction for multiplicity), least squares (LS) mean differences between asenapine and placebo on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at day 56 were not significant (-4.8 for 2.5 mg b.i.d., p=0.070; -5.6 for 5 mg b.i.d., p=0.064). Significant improvement in the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity score was observed in the 5 mg b.i.d. group versus placebo on day 56 (LS mean -0.3, p=0.024). In the acute phase, ≥7% weight gain and the composite event of somnolence, sedation, and hypersomnia were more common in both asenapine groups than in the placebo group. Akathisia, fasting glucose elevation, and extrapyramidal syndrome were more common in the 5 mg b.i.d. group than in the placebo group. There were no unexpected adverse events in the OLE, and PANSS total scores decreased by -16.1 points in the group previously treated with placebo (n=62) and by -11.2 points in the continuous asenapine group (n=131) from OLE baseline to week 26. CONCLUSIONS: Although improvements in PANSS total score at day 56 of the acute phase were numerically greater for both asenapine 2.5 and 5 mg b.i.d. than for placebo and were maintained in the OLE, the primary end-point did not achieve statistical significance in the acute phase. No new or unexpected safety concerns were detected during the acute phase or after an additional 26 weeks of asenapine treatment in the adolescent population with schizophrenia. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRY: NCT01190254 and NCT1190267 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

Weight change and metabolic effects of asenapine in patients with schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To describe weight changes and metabolic effects of asenapine compared with placebo and olanzapine in adults. METHOD: Post hoc analyses were performed using data from 17 asenapine trials (13 schizophrenia and 4 bipolar mania trials) with placebo (5-10 mg twice daily; n = 1,748; 1-6 weeks) and/or olanzapine (5-20 mg, once daily; n = 3,430; 3-100 weeks). Data were pooled based on treatment into placebo-controlled and olanzapine-controlled trials. For trials with placebo and olanzapine treatment groups, the asenapine population was included in both pools. Changes from baseline for weight, body mass index, and fasting lipid and glucose levels were determined. The Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities was used to define metabolic adverse events. RESULTS: Mean (standard error [SE]) weight change was greater with asenapine than with placebo (1.2 [0.2] vs 0.14 [0.2] kg; P < .0001) and similar in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Mean changes differed for asenapine versus placebo in triglycerides (1.8 [6.3] vs -12.2 [5.9] mg/dL; P < .01) and fasting glucose (1.9 [1.7] vs -1.6 [1.5] mg/dL; P < .05). In the olanzapine-controlled trials, weight change was significantly lower with asenapine than with olanzapine (0.9 [0.1] vs 3.1 [0.2] kg; P < .0001). Changes associated with asenapine were lower than those with olanzapine in fasting glucose (2.0 vs 3.3 mg/dL), total cholesterol (-0.4 [1.1] vs 6.2 [1.2] mg/dL; P < .0001), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.3 [1.1] vs 3.1 [1.2] mg/dL; P < .01), and triglycerides (-0.9 [5.4] vs 24.3 [5.8] mg/dL; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Asenapine was associated with greater weight gain and glucose changes than placebo and not associated with a meaningful change in triglycerides or cholesterol levels. Asenapine was not significantly different from olanzapine in change in glucose levels and lower than olanzapine with respect to triglycerides, weight gain, and increased cholesterol.

Naltrexone/Bupropion combination therapy in overweight or obese patients with major depressive disorder: results of a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of 32-mg/d naltrexone sustained release and 360-mg/d bupropion sustained release (NB32) in overweight and obese patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD: Twenty-five female patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of MDD, an Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report score > 26, and a body mass index ≥ 27 and ≤ 43 kg/m(2) received up to 24 weeks of open-label treatment with NB32 with dietary and behavioral counseling (data collection: March 2008-July 2009). The primary endpoint was change from baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at 12 weeks; secondary endpoints included MADRS total score at week 24, change in weight, and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale responder status (CGI-I score ≤ 2) at weeks 12 and 24 (modified intent-to-treat [mITT]: patients with ≥ 1 postbaseline MADRS total score on study drug; N = 23). RESULTS: MADRS scores showed significant reductions at weeks 12 and 24 (mITT-last observation carried forward [LOCF]: -13.1 ± 7.1 and -15.3 ± 8.1, respectively, P < .001 vs baseline for all). Mean ± SD weight loss was -4.0% ± 4.6% (mITT-LOCF) and -6.1% ± 4.7% (observed cases) at week 12 and -5.3% ± 6.5% (mITT-LOCF) and -9.2% ± 6.2% (observed cases) at week 24 (P < .001 vs baseline for all). By week 24, 95% of patients (mITT-LOCF) were responders (CGI-I score ≤ 2) and 70% were in remission (CGI-I score = 1). The safety/tolerability profile of NB32 was consistent with its individual components; the most common adverse events were nausea, constipation, headache, and insomnia, with no serious adverse events attributed to NB32. CONCLUSION: Twenty-four weeks of open-label NB32 therapy with dietary and behavioral counseling was associated with improvement in depressive symptoms and reduced body weight in overweight/obese women with MDD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00624858.

Effect of olanzapine on cognition during treatment of behavioral and psychiatric symptoms in patients with dementia: a post-hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to determine the effect of olanzapine treatment on cognition in elderly patients with behavioral and psychiatric symptoms (BPSD) associated with dementia. METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis of three randomized double-blind, clinical trials of olanzapine (n = 682) vs placebo (n = 257) in dementia patients with BPSD in long-term or continuing-care settings. One study was 6 weeks long; the other two were 10 weeks duration, and their data were combined. Patients were subgrouped according to baseline Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE) scores: Group I = 23-26; Group II = 19-22; Group III = 14-18; Group IV = 7-13; Group V = 1-6. BPSD was assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). RESULTS: Within-treatment group cognitive decline in patients was significant in the combined studies, but not in the 6-week study. Between-treatment cognitive changes were non-significant in the 6-week study, but showed a statistical trend in the combined studies (olanzapine, -0.78 +/- 0.19 vs placebo, -0.32 +/- 0.25; p = 0.06). In the subgroup analysis, there was a significant between-treatment difference in cognitive changes in MMSE subgroup IV in the combined studies (olanzapine, -0.63 +/- 0.26 vs placebo, 0.27 +/- 0.41, p = 0.04). Improvement in BPSD was correlated with better cognitive outcome (r = -0.2; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Although the overall differences in cognitive changes in patients treated with olanzapine vs placebo were small and non-significant, negative effects on cognition in some patients cannot be excluded, especially in patients with more pronounced cognitive decline or whose behavioral and psychiatric symptoms are not responding to treatment.

Zonisamide prevents olanzapine-associated hyperphagia, weight gain, and elevated blood glucose in rats.

Olanzapine (OLZ), one of the second-generation atypical antipsychotics (SGAs), has shown relative advantages in patient adherence and outcomes. However, OLZ has also been associated with a higher incidence of weight gain than most other SGAs. Excessive weight gain may in turn contribute to long-term health concerns for some individuals. Zonisamide (ZNS), a medication approved in the United States as an adjunct in the management of epilepsy, has a diverse pharmacological profile, including sodium channel blockade, monoamine enhancement, and inhibition of carbonic anhydrase. ZNS has also been reported to cause weight loss in both humans and rodents. We hypothesized that this profile might be beneficial when co-administered with OLZ. To test this hypothesis, we evaluated the effects of OLZ on body weight, as well as the pathways known to regulate feeding behavior and arousal in the Sprague-Dawley rat. As indicated via c-Fos expression, we found an OLZ-induced activation in the nucleus accumbens and orexin neurons in the lateral hypothalamus. An OLZ-associated development of hyperphagia, weight gain and elevated blood glucose in the rat was also found. These outcomes were attenuated and reversed in the presence of concomitant ZNS. These results suggest the hypothesis that ZNS may effectively treat or prevent weight gain or metabolic changes associated with the SGAs. Future studies of this combination in patients through appropriately designed human clinical studies are encouraged.

The cost of treating anxiety: the medical and demographic correlates that impact total medical costs.

The purpose of this retrospective, multivariate analysis is to examine how medical conditions and demographic characteristics affect the costs of treating individuals diagnosed with anxiety. Data from MarketScan Databases [The MEDSTAT Group, 2000] were used to identify individuals with new episodes of anxiety. Multivariate analysis was used, with the dependent variable being the log of total medical costs. This analysis controlled for demographic characteristics, medical comorbidities, anxiety diagnosis, and prior resource utilization. A smearing estimate is used to calculate the total medical costs for patients with any anxiety disorder. The mean estimated total medical cost for individuals diagnosed with any anxiety disorder was $6,475. The multivariate model indicates that controlling for demographics and other disease states, generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), panic disorders, and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) are associated with a $2,138, $1,603, and $3,940 increase, respectively, in the total medical cost (P < .0001). The incremental impact of depression, other anxiety disorders, and prior mental health diagnoses on the total medical costs were $1,945, $1,900, and $1,515, respectively (P < .0001). Individuals with the highest costs, and therefore the greatest need for intervention, are anxious patients with depression, individuals diagnosed with PTSD or GAD, and individuals diagnosed with both anxiety and a comorbid medical condition such as an acute myocardial infarction or diabetes.

Medical and productivity costs of anxiety disorders: case control study.

This retrospective case-control study examines the medical and productivity costs associated with a diagnosis of anxiety. The study used a data set from a large employer database that collected medical, pharmaceutical, absenteeism, short-term disability, and worker compensation records during 2000 from 6 major employers. Patients diagnosed with anxiety disorders (n= 1917) were matched at a 1:1 ratio to patients not diagnosed with anxiety disorders (n= 1917) based on age, sex, metropolitan statistical area, and type of insurance coverage. Paired-difference t tests, McNemer's test, and analyses of covariance were used to compare the anxiety population with the control group. Employees diagnosed with anxiety disorders were significantly more likely to have additional diagnoses, use more services, require hospitalization, or visit the emergency room compared with the control group. Furthermore, after controlling for differences in comorbidities, employees diagnosed with anxiety disorders had significantly higher medical costs [$1555; 95% confidence interval (CI) $1066-2043], productivity costs ($1366; 95% CI $708-2023), and total costs ($2920; 95% CI $2035-3805) compared with the control group. Results indicate that anxiety disorders are associated with significant medical and productivity costs.