iPSC-derived hindbrain organoids to evaluate escitalopram oxalate treatment responses targeting neuropsychiatric symptoms in Alzheimer's disease.

Alzheimer's disease (AD) is the most common cause of dementia, and the gradual deterioration of brain function eventually leads to death. Almost all AD patients suffer from neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS), the emergence of which correlates with dysfunctional serotonergic systems. Our aim is to generate hindbrain organoids containing serotonergic neurons using human induced Pluripotent Stem Cells (iPSCs). Work presented here is laying the groundwork for the application of hindbrain organoids to evaluate individual differences in disease progression, NPS development, and pharmacological treatment response. Human peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) from healthy volunteers (n = 3), an AD patient without NPS (n = 1), and AD patients with NPS (n = 2) were reprogrammed into iPSCs and subsequently differentiated into hindbrain organoids. The presence of serotonergic neurons was confirmed by quantitative reverse transcription PCR, flow cytometry, immunocytochemistry, and detection of released serotonin (5-HT). We successfully reprogrammed PBMCs into 6 iPSC lines, and subsequently generated hindbrain organoids from 6 individuals to study inter-patient variability using a precision medicine approach. To assess patient-specific treatment effects, organoids were treated with different concentrations of escitalopram oxalate, commonly prescribed for NPS. Changes in 5-HT levels before and after treatment with escitalopram were dose-dependent and variable across patients. Organoids from different people responded differently to the application of escitalopram in vitro. We propose that this 3D platform might be effectively used for drug screening purposes to predict patients with NPS most likely to respond to treatment in vivo and to understand the heterogeneity of treatment responses.

Adverse effects of methylphenidate for apathy in patients with Alzheimer's disease (ADMET2 trial).

OBJECTIVES: To examine clinically important adverse events (AEs) associated with methylphenidate (MPH) treatment of apathy in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) versus placebo, including weight loss, vital signs, falls, and insomnia. METHODS: The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET2) trial was a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled trial of MPH to treat apathy in individuals with apathy and AD. Participants in ADMET2 had vital signs and weight measured at monthly visits through 6 months. AEs, including insomnia, falls, and cardiovascular events, were reported at every visit by participants and families using a symptom checklist. RESULTS: The study included 98 participants in the MPH group and 101 in the placebo group. Participants in the MPH group experienced greater weight loss on average than the placebo through the 6-month follow-up, with a difference in change between MPH and placebo of 2.8 lb (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.7, 4.9 lb). No treatment group differences in change during the trial were found in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. More participants in the MPH group reported falls during the follow-up, 10 versus 6 in MPH and placebo groups, respectively. No differences in post-baseline insomnia were observed between the treatment groups. No participants reported instances of myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, stroke, or cardiomyopathy throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: MPH use in AD patients for treating apathy is relatively safe, particularly notable given the many medical comorbidities in this population. There was a statistically significant but modest weight loss associated with MPH use, and clinicians are thus advised to monitor weight during MPH treatment.

Heterogeneity of Response to Methylphenidate in Apathetic Patients in the ADMET 2 Trial.

OBJECTIVE: The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2) found that methylphenidate was effective in treating apathy with a small-to-medium effect size but showed heterogeneity in response. We assessed clinical predictors of response to help determine individual likelihood of treatment benefit from methylphenidate. DESIGN: Univariate and multivariate analyses of 22 clinical predictors of response chosen a priori. SETTING: Data from the ADMET 2 randomized, placebo controlled multi-center clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Alzheimer's disease patients with clinically significant apathy. MEASUREMENTS: Apathy assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory apathy domain (NPI-A). RESULTS: In total, 177 participants (67% male, mean [SD] age 76.4 [7.9], mini-mental state examination 19.3 [4.8]) had 6-months follow up data. Six potential predictors met criteria for inclusion in multivariate modeling. Methylphenidate was more efficacious in participants without NPI anxiety (change in NPI-A -2.21, standard error [SE]:0.60) or agitation (-2.63, SE:0.68), prescribed cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEI) (-2.44, SE:0.62), between 52 and 72 years of age (-2.93, SE:1.05), had 73-80 mm Hg diastolic blood pressure (-2.43, SE: 1.03), and more functional impairment (-2.56, SE:1.16) as measured by the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living scale. CONCLUSION: Individuals who were not anxious or agitated, younger, prescribed a ChEI, with optimal (73-80 mm Hg) diastolic blood pressure, or having more impaired function were more likely to benefit from methylphenidate compared to placebo. Clinicians may preferentially consider methylphenidate for apathetic AD participants already prescribed a ChEI and without baseline anxiety or agitation.

Cost consequence analysis of Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2).

BACKGROUND: This paper used data from the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (NCT02346201) to conduct a planned cost consequence analysis to investigate whether treatment of apathy with methylphenidate is economically attractive. METHODS: A total of 167 patients with clinically significant apathy randomized to either methylphenidate or placebo were included. The Resource Utilization in Dementia Lite instrument assessed resource utilization for the past 30 days and the EuroQol five dimension five level questionnaire assessed health utility at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months. Resources were converted to costs using standard sources and reported in 2021 USD. A repeated measures analysis of variance compared change in costs and utility over time between the treatment and placebo groups. A binary logistic regression was used to assess cost predictors. RESULTS: Costs were not significantly different between groups whether the cost of methylphenidate was excluded (F(2,330) = 0.626, ηp2 = 0.004, p = 0.535) or included (F(2,330) = 0.629, ηp2 = 0.004, p = 0.534). Utility improved with methylphenidate treatment as there was a group by time interaction (F(2,330) = 7.525, ηp2 = 0.044, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: Results from this study indicated that there was no evidence for a difference in resource utilization costs between methylphenidate and placebo treatment. However, utility improved significantly over the 6-month follow-up period. These results can aid in decision-making to improve quality of life in patients with Alzheimer's disease while considering the burden on the healthcare system.

Neurobiologic Rationale for Treatment of Apathy in Alzheimer's Disease With Methylphenidate.

The public health burden of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is related not only to cognitive symptoms, but also to neuropsychiatric symptoms, including apathy. Apathy is defined as a quantitative reduction of goal-directed activity in comparison to a previous level of functioning and affects 30%-70% of persons with AD. Previous attempts to treat apathy in AD-both nonpharmacologically and pharmacologically-have been wanting. Catecholaminergic treatment with methylphenidate has shown encouraging results in initial trials of apathy in AD. Understanding the neuronal circuits underlying motivated behavior and their reliance on catecholamine actions helps provide a rationale for methylphenidate actions in the treatment of apathy in patients with AD. Anatomical, physiological, and behavioral studies have identified parallel, cortical-basal ganglia circuits that govern action, cognition, and emotion and play key roles in motivated behavior. Understanding the distinct contributions to motivated behavior of subregions of the prefrontal cortex-dorsolateral, orbital-ventromedial, and dorsomedial-helps to explain why degeneration of these areas in AD results in apathetic behaviors. We propose that the degeneration of the prefrontal cortex in AD produces symptoms of apathy. We further propose that methylphenidate treatment may ameliorate those symptoms by boosting norepinephrine and dopamine actions in prefrontal-striatal-thalamocortical circuits.

Measuring Apathy in Alzheimer's Disease in the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2): A Comparison of Instruments.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic criteria for apathy have been published but have yet to be evaluated in the context of clinical trials. The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2) operationalized the diagnostic criteria for apathy (DCA) into a clinician-rated questionnaire informed by interviews with the patient and caregiver. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the present study was to compare the classification of apathy using the DCA with that using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-apathy (NPI-apathy) subscale in ADMET 2. Comparisons between NPI-Apathy and Dementia Apathy Interview Rating (DAIR) scale, and DCA and DAIR were also explored. METHODS: ADMET 2 is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial examining the effects of 20 mg/day methylphenidate on symptoms of apathy over 6 months in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Participants scoring at least 4 on the NPI-Apathy were recruited. This analysis focuses on cross-sectional correlations between baseline apathy scale scores using cross-tabulation. RESULTS: Of 180 participants, the median age was 76.5 years and they were predominantly white (92.8%) and male (66.1%). The mean (±standard deviation) scores were 7.7 ± 2.4 on the NPI-apathy, and 1.9 ± 0.5 on the DAIR. Of those with NPI-defined apathy, 169 (93.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 89.3%-96.9%) met DCA diagnostic criteria. The DCA and DAIR overlapped on apathy diagnosis for 169 participants (93.9%, 95% CI 89.3%-96.9%). CONCLUSION: The measurements used for the assessment of apathy in patients with AD had a high degree of overlap with the DCA. The NPI-apathy cut-off used to determine apathy in ADMET 2 selects those likely to meet DCA criteria.

Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD): Methods and design of an investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled, multicenter clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a disabling, common cause of dementia, and agitation is one of the most common and distressing symptoms for patients with AD. Escitalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (S-CitAD) tests a novel, clinically derived therapeutic approach to treat agitation in patients with AD. METHODS: S-CitAD is a NIH-funded, investigator-initiated, randomized, multicenter clinical trial. Participants receive a structured psychosocial intervention (PSI) as standard of care. Participants without sufficient response to PSI are randomized to receive 15 mg escitalopram/day or a matching placebo in addition to PSI. Primary outcome is the Modified Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study - Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). DISCUSSION: S-CitAD will provide information about a practical, immediately available approach to treating agitation in patients with AD. S-CitAD may become a model of how to evaluate and predict treatment response in patients with AD and agitation as a neuropsychiatric symptom (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03108846).

Two phase 3 trials of bapineuzumab in mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: Bapineuzumab, a humanized anti-amyloid-beta monoclonal antibody, is in clinical development for the treatment of Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trials involving patients with mild-to-moderate Alzheimer's disease--one involving 1121 carriers of the apolipoprotein E (APOE) ε4 allele and the other involving 1331 noncarriers. Bapineuzumab or placebo, with doses varying by study, was administered by intravenous infusion every 13 weeks for 78 weeks. The primary outcome measures were scores on the 11-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-cog11, with scores ranging from 0 to 70 and higher scores indicating greater impairment) and the Disability Assessment for Dementia (DAD, with scores ranging from 0 to 100 and higher scores indicating less impairment). A total of 1090 carriers and 1114 noncarriers were included in the efficacy analysis. Secondary outcome measures included findings on positron-emission tomographic amyloid imaging with the use of Pittsburgh compound B (PIB-PET) and cerebrospinal fluid phosphorylated tau (phospho-tau) concentrations. RESULTS: There were no significant between-group differences in the primary outcomes. At week 78, the between-group differences in the change from baseline in the ADAS-cog11 and DAD scores (bapineuzumab group minus placebo group) were -0.2 (P=0.80) and -1.2 (P=0.34), respectively, in the carrier study; the corresponding differences in the noncarrier study were -0.3 (P=0.64) and 2.8 (P=0.07) with the 0.5-mg-per-kilogram dose of bapineuzumab and 0.4 (P=0.62) and 0.9 (P=0.55) with the 1.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. The major safety finding was amyloid-related imaging abnormalities with edema among patients receiving bapineuzumab, which increased with bapineuzumab dose and APOE ε4 allele number and which led to discontinuation of the 2.0-mg-per-kilogram dose. Between-group differences were observed with respect to PIB-PET and cerebrospinal fluid phospho-tau concentrations in APOE ε4 allele carriers but not in noncarriers. CONCLUSIONS: Bapineuzumab did not improve clinical outcomes in patients with Alzheimer's disease, despite treatment differences in biomarkers observed in APOE ε4 carriers. (Funded by Janssen Alzheimer Immunotherapy and Pfizer; Bapineuzumab 301 and 302 ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00575055 and NCT00574132, and EudraCT number, 2009-012748-17.).

Trajectories of Neuropsychiatric Symptoms and Cognitive Decline in Mild Cognitive Impairment.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the course of neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS) in adults with mild cognitive impairment (MCI), and to examine baseline individual-level predictors and associated cognitive and functional outcomes. DESIGN: A 2-year prospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicenter clinical settings. PARTICIPANTS: Five hundred sixty individuals with MCI at baseline. MEASUREMENTS: NPS severity (measured using Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire) and cognitive and functional outcomes were assessed at baseline and every 6 months thereafter. Potential individual-level predictors were collected at baseline. RESULTS: Three latent classes of NPS courses were identified using growth mixture modeling: a stable class in which a low NPS burden remained relatively unchanged over time (N = 503, 89.8%); a worsened class in which an initially moderate NPS burden increased (N = 39, 7.0%); and an improved class in which an initially high NPS burden decreased (N = 18, 3.2%). There were no associations between class membership and baseline individual characteristics. Members of the worsened class were 1.74 times more likely to be diagnosed with incident Alzheimer disease (AD) than members of the stable class (95% confidence interval: 1.07-2.84). The worsened class also showed significantly more rapid declines in cognitive and functional outcomes than the stable class. Class membership did not predict rate of brain atrophy. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with MCI may experience different trajectories of NPS over time. Patients with worsening NPS may be at greater risk of developing AD and severe cognitive and functional impairment.

R- and S-citalopram concentrations have differential effects on neuropsychiatric scores in elders with dementia and agitation.

AIMS: The aim was to determine the relationship between (R) and (S)-citalopram enantiomer exposure (AUC(0,24 h)) and therapeutic response in agitated individuals greater than 60 years old with Alzheimer's dementia (AD). METHODS: Citalopram enantiomer exposures (AUC(0,24 h)) derived from an established population pharmacokinetic analysis were utilized to explore the relationship between (R)- and (S)-citalopram area under the curve (AUC(0,24 )) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Neurobehavioural Rating Scale-Agitation Subscale (NBRS-A), modified Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory Agitation subscale (NPIA) scores. Time dependent changes in these scores (disease progression) were accounted for prior to exploring the exposure effect relationship for each enantiomer. These relationships were evaluated using a non-linear-mixed effects modelling approach as implemented in nonmem v7.3. RESULTS: (S)-AUC(0,24 h) and (R)-AUC(0,24 h) each contributed to improvement in NBRS-A scores (k3(R) -0.502; k4(S) -0.712) as did time in treatment. However, increasing (R)-AUC(0,24 h) decreased the probability of patient response (maximum Δ -0.182%/AUC(0,24 h)) based on the CGIC while (S)-AUC(0,24 h) improved the probability of response (maximum Δ 0.112%/AUC(0,24 h)). (R)-AUC(0,24 h) was also associated with worsening in MMSE scores (-0.5 points). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that citalopram enantiomers contributed differentially to treatment outcomes. (R)-citalopram accounted for a greater proportion of the adverse consequences associated with racemic citalopram treatment in patients with AD including a decreased probability of treatment response as measured by the CGIC and a reduction in MMSE scores. The S-enantiomer was associated with increased probability of response based on the CGIC.

Citalopram for the Treatment of Agitation in Alzheimer Dementia: Genetic Influences.

OBJECTIVE: To assess potential genetic influences on citalopram treatment efficacy for agitation in individuals with Alzheimer dementia (AD). Six functional genetic variants were studied in the following genes: serotonin receptor 2A (HTR2A-T102C), serotonin receptor 2C (HTR2C-Cys23Ser), serotonin transporter (5HTT-LPR), brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF-Val66Met), apolipoprotein E (ε2, ε3, ε4 variants), and cytochrome P450 (CYP2C19). Treatment response by genotype was measured by (1) the agitation domain of the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale, (2) the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change scale (mADCS-CGIC), (3) the agitation domain of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and (4) the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory. METHOD: We utilized data from the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease (CitAD) database. CitAD was a 9-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial showing significant improvement in agitation and caregiver distress in patients treated with citalopram. Proportional odds logistic regression and mixed effects models were used to examine the above-mentioned outcome measures. RESULTS: Significant interactions were noted on the NPI agitation domain for HTR2A (likelihood ratio [LR] = 6.19, df = 2, P = .04) and the mADCS-CGIC for HTR2C (LR = 4.33, df = 2, P = .02) over 9 weeks. DISCUSSION: Treatment outcomes in CitAD showed modest, although statistically significant, influence of genetic variation at HTR2A and HTR2C loci. Future studies should continue to examine the interaction of known genetic variants with antidepressant treatment in patients with AD having agitation.

A population pharmacokinetic model for R- and S-citalopram and desmethylcitalopram in Alzheimer's disease patients with agitation.

The citalopram for Alzheimer's disease trial evaluated citalopram for the management for agitation in Alzheimer's disease patients. Sparse data was available from this elderly patient population. A nonlinear mixed effects population pharmacokinetic modeling approach was used to describe the pharmacokinetics of R- and S-citalopram and their primary metabolite (desmethylcitalopram). A structural model with 4 compartments (one compartment/compound) with linear oral absorption and elimination described the data adequately. Overall, the model showed that clearance of the R-enantiomer was slower than the clearance of the S-enantiomer. Without accounting for any patient-specific covariates, the population estimate of the metabolic clearance of citalopram was 8.6 (R-citalopram) and 14 L/h (S-citalopram). The population estimate of the clearance of desmethylcitalopram was 23.8 (R-Dcit) and 38.5 L/h (S-Dcit). Several patient-specific covariates were found to have a significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of R,S-citalopram and desmethylcitalopram. A significant difference in the metabolic clearance of R-citalopram between males and females (13 vs 9.05 L/h) was identified in this analysis. Both R- and S-citalopram metabolic clearance decreased with age. Additionally, consistent with literature reports S-citalopram metabolic clearance increased with increasing body weight and was significantly influenced by CYPC19 genotype, with a difference of 5.8 L/h between extensive/rapid and intermediate/poor metabolizers. R,S-desmethylcitalopram clearance increased with increasing body weight. This model may allow for the opportunity to delineate the effect of R- and S-citalopram on pharmacodynamics outcomes related to the management of agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

Time to Response to Citalopram Treatment for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Agitation is a common and significant problem in Alzheimer disease (AD). In the recent Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease (CitAD) study, citalopram was efficacious for the treatment of AD agitation. Here we examined the time course and predictors of response to treatment. METHODS: Response in CitAD was defined as a modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) score of 1 or 2 or a Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) score reduction ≥ 50% from baseline. "Stable early response" was defined as meeting the aforementioned criteria at both weeks 3 and 9, "late response" was response at week 9 but not at week 3, and "unstable response" was response at week 3 but not at week 9. RESULTS: In the primary analyses, citalopram was superior to placebo on both the CGIC and the NBRS-A response measures. Little between-group differences were found in response rates in the first 3 weeks of the study (21% versus 19% on the CGIC). Citalopram patients were more likely than placebo patients to be a late responder (18% versus 8% on CGIC, Fisher's exact p = 0.09; 31% versus 15% on NBRS-A, Fisher's exact p = 0.02). Approximately half of citalopram responders (45%-56%) at end of study achieved response later in the study compared with 30%-44% of placebo responders. CONCLUSION: Treatment with citalopram for agitation in AD needs to be at least 9 weeks in duration to allow sufficient time for full response. Study duration is an important factor to consider in the design of clinical trials for agitation in AD.

Agitation in cognitive disorders: International Psychogeriatric Association provisional consensus clinical and research definition.

BACKGROUND: Agitation is common across neuropsychiatric disorders and contributes to disability, institutionalization, and diminished quality of life for patients and their caregivers. There is no consensus definition of agitation and no widespread agreement on what elements should be included in the syndrome. The International Psychogeriatric Association formed an Agitation Definition Work Group (ADWG) to develop a provisional consensus definition of agitation in patients with cognitive disorders that can be applied in epidemiologic, non-interventional clinical, pharmacologic, non-pharmacologic interventional, and neurobiological studies. A consensus definition will facilitate communication and cross-study comparison and may have regulatory applications in drug development programs. METHODS: The ADWG developed a transparent process using a combination of electronic, face-to-face, and survey-based strategies to develop a consensus based on agreement of a majority of participants. Nine-hundred twenty-eight respondents participated in the different phases of the process. RESULTS: Agitation was defined broadly as: (1) occurring in patients with a cognitive impairment or dementia syndrome; (2) exhibiting behavior consistent with emotional distress; (3) manifesting excessive motor activity, verbal aggression, or physical aggression; and (4) evidencing behaviors that cause excess disability and are not solely attributable to another disorder (psychiatric, medical, or substance-related). A majority of the respondents rated all surveyed elements of the definition as "strongly agree" or "somewhat agree" (68-88% across elements). A majority of the respondents agreed that the definition is appropriate for clinical and research applications. CONCLUSIONS: A provisional consensus definition of agitation has been developed. This definition can be used to advance interventional and non-interventional research of agitation in patients with cognitive impairment.

Change in agitation in Alzheimer's disease in the placebo arm of a nine-week controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Placebo responses raise significant challenges for the design of clinical trials. We report changes in agitation outcomes in the placebo arm of a recent trial of citalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (CitAD). METHODS: In the CitAD study, all participants and caregivers received a psychosocial intervention and 92 were assigned to placebo for nine weeks. Outcomes included Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A), modified AD Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Agitation/Aggression domain (NPI A/A) and Total (NPI-Total) and ADLs. Continuous outcomes were analyzed with mixed-effects modeling and dichotomous outcomes with logistic regression. RESULTS: Agitation outcomes improved over nine weeks: NBRS-A mean (SD) decreased from 7.8 (3.0) at baseline to 5.4 (3.2), CMAI from 28.7 (6.7) to 26.7 (7.4), NPI A/A from 8.0 (2.4) to 4.9 (3.8), and NPI-Total from 37.3 (17.7) to 28.4 (22.1). The proportion of CGI-C agitation responders ranged from 21 to 29% and was significantly different from zero. MMSE improved from 14.4 (6.9) to 15.7 (7.2) and ADLs similarly improved. Most of the improvement was observed by three weeks and was sustained through nine weeks. The major predictor of improvement in each agitation measure was a higher baseline score in that measure. CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant placebo response which may be due to regression to the mean, response to a psychosocial intervention, natural course of symptoms, or nonspecific benefits of participation in a trial.

Effect of Dextromethorphan-Quinidine on Agitation in Patients With Alzheimer Disease Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common among patients with Alzheimer disease; safe, effective treatments are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dextromethorphan hydrobromide-quinidine sulfate for Alzheimer disease-related agitation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2 randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using a sequential parallel comparison design with 2 consecutive 5-week treatment stages conducted August 2012-August 2014. Patients with probable Alzheimer disease, clinically significant agitation (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity agitation score ≥4), and a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 8 to 28 participated at 42 US study sites. Stable dosages of antidepressants, antipsychotics, hypnotics, and antidementia medications were allowed. INTERVENTIONS: In stage 1, 220 patients were randomized in a 3:4 ratio to receive dextromethorphan-quinidine (n = 93) or placebo (n = 127). In stage 2, patients receiving dextromethorphan-quinidine continued; those receiving placebo were stratified by response and rerandomized in a 1:1 ratio to dextromethorphan-quinidine (n = 59) or placebo (n = 60). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was change from baseline on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Agitation/Aggression domain (scale range, 0 [absence of symptoms] to 12 [symptoms occur daily and with marked severity]). RESULTS: A total of 194 patients (88.2%) completed the study. With the sequential parallel comparison design, 152 patients received dextromethorphan-quinidine and 127 received placebo during the study. Analysis combining stages 1 (all patients) and 2 (rerandomized placebo nonresponders) showed significantly reduced NPI Agitation/Aggression scores for dextromethorphan-quinidine vs placebo (ordinary least squares z statistic, -3.95; P < .001). In stage 1, mean NPI Agitation/Aggression scores were reduced from 7.1 to 3.8 with dextromethorphan-quinidine and from 7.0 to 5.3 with placebo. Between-group treatment differences were significant in stage 1 (least squares mean, -1.5; 95% CI, -2.3 to -0.7; P<.001). In stage 2, NPI Agitation/Aggression scores were reduced from 5.8 to 3.8 with dextromethorphan-quinidine and from 6.7 to 5.8 with placebo. Between-group treatment differences were also significant in stage 2 (least squares mean, -1.6; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.3; P=.02). Adverse events included falls (8.6% for dextromethorphan-quinidine vs 3.9% for placebo), diarrhea (5.9% vs 3.1% respectively), and urinary tract infection (5.3% vs 3.9% respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in 7.9% with dextromethorphan-quinidine vs 4.7% with placebo. Dextromethorphan-quinidine was not associated with cognitive impairment, sedation, or clinically significant QTc prolongation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this preliminary 10-week phase 2 randomized clinical trial of patients with probable Alzheimer disease, combination dextromethorphan-quinidine demonstrated clinically relevant efficacy for agitation and was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01584440.

Is sertraline treatment or depression remission in depressed Alzheimer patients associated with improved caregiver well being? Depression in Alzheimer's Disease Study 2.

OBJECTIVE: We wanted to assess if sertraline treatment (versus placebo) or remission of depression at 12 weeks (versus nonremission) in Alzheimer patients is associated with improved caregiver well being. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial of the efficacy and safety of sertraline for the treatment of depression in individuals with Alzheimer disease in five clinical research sites across the United States. Participants were caregivers of patients enrolled in the Depression in Alzheimer's Disease Study 2 (N = 131). All caregivers received standardized psychosocial support throughout the study. Caregiver outcome measures included depression (Beck Depression Inventory), distress (Neuropsychiatric Inventory), burden (Zarit Burden Interview), and quality of life (Medical Outcomes Study Short Form Health Survey). RESULTS: Fifty-nine percent of caregivers were spouses, 63.4% were women, and 64.1% were white. Caregivers of patients in both treatment groups had significant reductions in distress scores over the 24-week study period, but there was not a greater benefit for caregivers of patients taking sertraline. However, caregivers of patients whose depression was in remission at week 12 had greater declines in distress scores over the 24 weeks than caregivers of patients whose depression did not remit by week 12. CONCLUSION: Patient treatment with sertraline was not associated with significantly greater reductions in caregiver distress than placebo treatment. Distress but not level of depression or burden lessened for all caregivers regardless of remission status and even more so for those who cared for patients whose depression remitted. Results imply an interrelationship between caregiver distress and patient psychiatric outcomes.

Effect of citalopram on agitation in Alzheimer disease: the CitAD randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common, persistent, and associated with adverse consequences for patients with Alzheimer disease. Pharmacological treatment options, including antipsychotics are not satisfactory. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of citalopram for agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease. Key secondary objectives examined effects of citalopram on function, caregiver distress, safety, cognitive safety, and tolerability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease Study (CitAD) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial that enrolled 186 patients with probable Alzheimer disease and clinically significant agitation from 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Participants (n = 186) were randomized to receive a psychosocial intervention plus either citalopram (n = 94) or placebo (n = 92) for 9 weeks. Dosage began at 10 mg per day with planned titration to 30 mg per day over 3 weeks based on response and tolerability. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were based on scores from the 18-point Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) and the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). Other outcomes were based on scores from the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safety (based on scores from the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events. RESULTS: Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement compared with those who received placebo on both primary outcome measures. The NBRS-A estimated treatment difference at week 9 (citalopram minus placebo) was -0.93 (95% CI, -1.80 to -0.06), P = .04. Results from the mADCS-CGIC showed 40% of citalopram participants having moderate or marked improvement from baseline compared with 26% of placebo recipients, with estimated treatment effect (odds ratio [OR] of being at or better than a given CGIC category) of 2.13 (95% CI, 1.23-3.69), P = .01. Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement on the CMAI, total NPI, and caregiver distress scores but not on the NPI agitation subscale, ADLs, or in less use of rescue lorazepam. Worsening of cognition (-1.05 points; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.13; P = .03) and QT interval prolongation (18.1 ms; 95% CI, 6.1-30.1; P = .01) were seen in the citalopram group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00898807.