Long-term open-label safety study of galcanezumab in patients with episodic or chronic cluster headache.

BACKGROUND: CGAR, a Phase 3b open-label study, evaluated the long-term safety of galcanezumab in patients with cluster headache who completed one of two Phase 3 double-blind studies in chronic or episodic cluster headache. METHODS: Patients (N = 164) received galcanezumab 300 mg subcutaneously up to once a month. Primary endpoint was safety, as assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and suicidality. Other endpoints included discontinuation rates, immunogenicity, efficacy as assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and health values. RESULTS: At baseline, mean (standard deviation) age was 48.3 (9.8) years, 75.0% were men, and 85.4% were white. Treatment-emergent adverse events (n = 119 [72.6%]) were mostly mild-to-moderate, with nasopharyngitis the most commonly reported (22.0%). One of 18 serious adverse events was judged as treatment related (constipation). Two patients (1.2%) reported suicidal ideation. Five patients (3.1%) discontinued due to an adverse event. Eight patients were treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody positive, two of whom were not treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody positive in the parent studies. On the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, ≥81% reported their cluster headache status as very much, much, or a little better at Months 1, 6, and 12. Health value scores generally improved from baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label study, galcanezumab was generally well tolerated and improved patient-reported cluster headache status.Trial registration number: NCT02797951; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02797951.

Tolerability and safety of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache with up to 15 months of galcanezumab treatment.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to assess the tolerability and safety of galcanezumab in patients with chronic cluster headache (CH) with up to 15 months of treatment. BACKGROUND: Chronic CH is a highly debilitating disease with a substantial and unmet medical need. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive placebo or galcanezumab (300 mg) monthly for 12 weeks, followed by an optional 52-week open-label extension and 16-week posttreatment follow-up (washout). This is a secondary analysis and long-term follow-up of a previously conducted clinical trial. The safety analysis included patients who received galcanezumab at any time during the study. Outcomes included adverse events (AEs), discontinuations, laboratory values, vital signs, electrocardiograms (ECGs), and suicidality ratings. RESULTS: A total of 233 patients received at least one galcanezumab dose. The mean exposure was 341 days. Galcanezumab-treated patients were mostly male (n = 169/233; 72.5%) with a mean age of 44.9 (±10.9) years. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported by 185 patients (n = 185/233; 79.4%), 23 patients (n = 23/233; 9.9%) reported serious adverse events (SAEs), and 18 patients (n = 18/233; 7.7%) discontinued due to AEs. The SAE CH was reported by three patients. The most common TEAEs (>10%) were nasopharyngitis (n = 41/233; 17.6%) and injection site pain (n = 33/233; 14.2%). 27.5% of patients (n = 64/233) had TEAEs related to injection sites. Likely hypersensitivity events, including injection site rash, injection site urticaria, and injection site hypersensitivity were reported (n = 14/233; 6.0%). There were past histories of suicidal ideation (n = 55/237; 23.2%) and suicidal behavior (n = 9/236; 3.8%). During the study, 15 patients (n = 15/230; 6.5%), seven with previous history, reported suicidal ideation. One patient had a nonfatal suicide attempt during the open-label extension and an aborted attempt during the washout. There were no new safety findings compared with the placebo-controlled treatment period in laboratory values, vital signs, or ECGs. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab 300 mg monthly had a favorable tolerability and safety profile in patients with chronic CH with up to 15 months of treatment.

Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated a significant reduction in monthly migraine headache days in phase 2 and 3 trials. In these analyses, we aimed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of galcanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic or chronic migraine. METHODS: Data were integrated from three double-blind clinical studies for the up to 6-month galcanezumab exposure group (N = 1435), and from five clinical studies for the up to 1-year all-galcanezumab exposure group (N = 2276). Patients received a monthly 120 mg subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab (with a 240 mg loading dose in month 1), 240 mg galcanezumab, or placebo. Outcomes measured were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuation due to AEs (DCAEs). Laboratory results, vital signs, electrocardiogram (ECG), suicidal ideation and behavior results were evaluated. RESULTS: TEAEs that occurred more frequently in galcanezumab-treated patients included injection site pain, injection site reactions excluding pain, constipation, vertigo, and pruritus. The proportion of DCAEs among galcanezumab-treated patients ranged between 1.8 and 3.0%, and differed from placebo group for galcanezumab 240 mg (P < 0.05). Fewer than 2.0% of patients in either galcanezumab dose-group compared with 1.0% of placebo-treated patients reported a SAE. There were no clinically meaningful differences between galcanezumab and placebo in laboratory measures, vital signs including blood pressure, ECGs, cardiovascular-related AEs, or suicidal ideation and behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile for up to 1 year of treatment for the prevention of migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials CGAB = NCT02163993, EVOLVE-1 = NCT02614183, EVOLVE-2 = NCT02614196, REGAIN = NCT02614261, and CGAJ = NCT02614287. All were first posted on 25 November 2015, except CGAB posted on 16 June 2014, and before enrolling the first patient.

Correction to: Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in the values for 'Hypersensitivity SMQ' and 'Rash' in Table 7.

Long-Term, Open-Label, Safety Study of Edivoxetine 12 to 18 mg Once Daily as Adjunctive Treatment for Patients With Major Depressive Disorder Who Are Partial Responders to Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitor Treatment.

Long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of adjunctive edivoxetine hydrochloride (hereafter edivoxetine), a highly selective and potent norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, was assessed in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) experiencing partial response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment. Data are from a multicenter, 54-week, open-label trial of adjunctive edivoxetine 12 to 18 mg once daily in patients with MDD who had experienced partial response by history to 6 or more weeks of current selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor therapy and who had a 17-item GRID Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score 16 or higher at study entry. Safety measures included discontinuation rate, treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and vital signs. Efficacy measures included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. Of 608 patients, 328 (54%) completed the open-label adjunctive treatment. Study discontinuation due to adverse events occurred in 17.0%, and there were 13 serious adverse events (1 death). Treatment-emergent adverse events 5% or higher were nausea, hyperhidrosis, constipation, headache, dry mouth, dizziness, vomiting, insomnia, and upper respiratory tract infection. Mean increases were observed in systolic blood pressure (range, 0.0-2.3 mm Hg), diastolic blood pressure (range, 1.9-3.3 mm Hg), and pulse (range, 5.9-8.4 beats per minute). Mean improvements on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (-17.0) were observed from baseline to week 54. The safety profile from this study provides an overview of outcomes associated with edivoxetine and norepinephrine reuptake inhibition as an adjunctive treatment in patients with MDD who were treated up to 1 year.

A cohort study of the risk of seizures in a pediatric population treated with atomoxetine or stimulant medications.

PURPOSE: Stimulant medications used for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can be associated with an increased risk of seizures. Atomoxetine is a non-stimulant medication approved for treating ADHD. This retrospective cohort analysis evaluated risk of seizures among pediatric patients naïve to ADHD medication therapy, with exposure to atomoxetine relative to stimulant medications. METHODS: Among members of a large US health plan from 1/1/2003 to 12/31/2006, aged 6-17 years, we identified initiators of atomoxetine or stimulants with no evidence of prior study drug use. We created study cohorts using propensity score matching within 6-month calendar blocks. The outcome was a seizure event in the 6-month follow-up period verified through medical record review. Relative risks (RR) based on current use of each study drug adjusted for baseline covariates were calculated using Poisson regression. We estimated hazard ratios from Cox proportional hazards models for the comparison of atomoxetine to stimulants based on initial cohort assignment. RESULTS: We matched 13,398 initiators of atomoxetine to 13,322 initiators of stimulants. We identified 97 seizure events. After adjustment, current atomoxetine therapy was associated with a non-statistically significant 28% lower risk of seizure compared to current stimulant therapy (RR 0.72; 95%CI 0.37, 1.38). The adjusted RR of seizure with atomoxetine compared to stimulants based on initial cohort assignment was 0.90 (95%CI 0.54, 1.49). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support an increase in the risk of seizure with atomoxetine therapy. The risk of seizure was not significantly different between pediatric patients taking atomoxetine compared with those taking stimulants.

Atomoxetine and cerebrovascular outcomes in adults.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the association between atomoxetine and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and transient ischemic attack (TIA) in adults. METHODS: This cohort study conducted within a health insurance database included 21,606 atomoxetine initiators matched to 21,606 stimulant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication initiators on the basis of propensity scores and a sample from the source population (N = 42,993). Outcomes were confirmed through a medical record review or a National Death Index search. Poisson regression was used to estimate the rate ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) of CVA or TIA according to the treatment. Cox regression was used to estimate the hazards ratio (HR) and 95% CI for comparisons across cohorts. RESULTS: Forty-four CVAs and 21 TIAs occurred during a mean follow-up of 1.5 years. The rate ratio of the current atomoxetine compared with the current stimulant ADHD medication was 1.38 for CVA (95% CI, 0.42-4.54) and 0.31 for TIA (95% CI, 0.04-2.63). Results for atomoxetine compared with the stimulant ADHD medication according to initial cohort assignment were consistent, with no increased risk for CVA or TIA. An increased risk of TIA was observed between initiation of an ADHD medication compared with the general population (HR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.13-10.60); however, a similar pattern was not observed for CVA (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.34-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support an increased risk of CV events with atomoxetine compared with the stimulant ADHD medication. Users of ADHD medications may be at an increased risk of TIA compared with the general population.

Hepatic events associated with atomoxetine treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes and assesses potential hepatobiliary events related to atomoxetine therapy, as reported in clinical trials and as spontaneous adverse event reports post-launch in 2002. METHODS: Case reports that contained potential hepatobiliary events were identified by a computerized search of the Eli Lilly and Company atomoxetine spontaneous adverse events and clinical trials databases. All cases were reviewed by at least two company physicians, one with expertise in hepatology, to determine the relevance of the information in respect of potential liver toxicity. RESULTS: Of 7961 paediatric and adult patients treated with atomoxetine in clinical trials, 41 were identified as having hepatobiliary events requiring additional analysis. Most of these events were mild increases in ALT and AST levels. None of these cases met Hy's rule criteria or progressed to liver failure. During the 4 years after market launch, 351 spontaneous reports of adverse events were related to the liver, of which 69 had other explanations unrelated to atomoxetine. Of the remaining 282 cases, 133 contained possible confounding factors (and were deemed to be possibly related), 146 presented too little information to assess, and three suggested atomoxetine as a probable cause of liver injuries. One of the three had a positive rechallenge. All three patients recovered after discontinuation of the drug. CONCLUSIONS: Since the launch of atomoxetine therapy, three spontaneously reported cases of reversible drug-induced liver injury were deemed probably related to it. Atomoxetine should be discontinued in patients with jaundice or laboratory evidence of liver injury and should not be restarted.

Meta-analysis of suicide-related behavior events in patients treated with atomoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: The present work examined suicide-related events in acute, double-blind, and placebo- or active comparator-controlled trials with atomoxetine. METHOD: Fourteen trials in pediatric patients were included. Potential events were identified in the adverse events database using a text-string search. Potential suicide-related events were categorized according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration-defined codes using blinded patient summaries. The meta-analyses used the Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio methods. RESULTS: No patient in atomoxetine attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) trials committed suicide. The frequency of suicidal ideation was 0.37% (5/1357) in pediatric patients taking atomoxetine versus 0% (0/851) for the placebo group; Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference of 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.09-0.83; p =.016) and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio of 2.92 (95% confidence interval 0.63-13.57; p =.172). Frequencies of suicide-related events in pediatric patients with ADHD did not differ between methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatments (Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference of -0.12 (95% confidence interval -0.62 to 0.38; p =.649). The number needed to harm in pediatric patients for an additional suicide-related event is 227 compared to the number needed to treat of five to achieve remission of ADHD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Although uncommon, suicidal ideation was significantly more frequent in pediatric ADHD patients treated with atomoxetine compared to those treated with placebo. Retrospective analysis has limitations in ascertaining intent.

Meta-analysis of aggression or hostility events in randomized, controlled clinical trials of atomoxetine for ADHD.

BACKGROUND: We systematically examined potential aggression/hostility-related events in a meta-analysis of acute clinical trials of atomoxetine for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Pediatric patients from 14 trials of atomoxetine were subdivided into a placebo-controlled (atomoxetine n = 1308, placebo n = 806) or active comparator databases (atomoxetine n = 566, methylphenidate n = 472). A third database comprised adult patients from placebo-controlled studies (atomoxetine n = 541, placebo n = 405). A computerized search of adverse events and comments identified patients with potential aggression/hostility events. Mantel-Haenszel incidence differences (MHID) were calculated. RESULTS: In the placebo-controlled database, we observed 21 atomoxetine and 9 placebo patients with reported aggression/hostility events, MHID of .6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -.4, 1.7). In the active comparator database, there were seven events in atomoxetine and four in methylphenidate patients, MHID = .2% (95% CI: -1.0,1.3). In the adult database, there were no events in 0 atomoxetine and one placebo patient, MHID = -.3% (95% CI: -.8, .2). CONCLUSIONS: Aggression/hostility-related events occurred in less than 2% of patients and were more frequent in pediatric patients treated with atomoxetine versus placebo (risk ratio of 1.33; not statistically significant). The risk of aggression/hostility events was similar in patients treated with atomoxetine or methylphenidate.

Transition from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder--a preliminary tolerability and efficacy study.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been psychostimulants. Recently developed nonpsychostimulant treatments have allowed certain patients to switch from a psychostimulant to a nonpsychostimulant. However, the outcomes of such switches have not been systematically studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to assess treatment tolerance and efficacy during a cross-taper transition from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine among children and adolescents with ADHD. METHODS: This pilot study was conducted in patients (aged 6-17 years) with incomplete responses (failure to obtain full reduction/elimination of symptoms) or intolerance of adverse events (AEs) during psychostimulant treatment. Patients continued ongoing psychostimulant treatment during the first week of the study. Transition to atomoxetine began by administering atomoxetine 0.5 mg/kg . d plus full-dose psychostimulant for 1 week, followed in the second week by 1.2 mg/kg . d atomoxetine plus half-dose psychostimulant. Patients remained on 1.2 mg/kg . d atomoxetine monotherapy for the remaining 5 weeks. This stepwise transition was enacted due to the difference in pharmacodynamics between the psychostimulants and atomoxetine. Applying a stepwise cross-titration allowed for better control of ADHD symptoms during the intervening period. Change in ADHD symptoms, as measured by the mean change in the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV-Parent Version: Investigator-administered and -scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv), was assessed from baseline to end point. RESULTS: Of the 62 subjects enrolled in the study, 39 (62.9%) were diagnosed as ADHD-combined type. Similar proportions were receiving methylphenidate (51.6%) and amphetamine (48.4%). Slightly more wished to switch due to inadequate response (53.2%) than intolerability (46.8%). Nine subjects discontinued at various times during the course of the study (patient or parent/caregiver decision [4], AE [2], protocol violation [2], and lack of efficacy [1]). Mean (SD) ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv total scores (n = 59, last-observation-carried-forward) improved significantly from baseline (visit 2) to an end point (32.1 [10.5] vs 22.6 [14.0]; P < 0.001). Of the 58 subjects answering in the atomoxetine monotherapy phase, 38 (65.5%) reported a preference for atomoxetine treatment over their previous psychostimulant. Tolerability results were as follows: 26 (44.1%) of 59 patients reported >or=1 AE, the most common being somnolence (4 [6.8%]), fatigue (3 [5.1%]), decreased appetite (3 [5.1%]), cough (3 [5.1%]), headache (3 [5.1%]), and contact dermatitis (2 [3.4%]). No clinically severe AEs were reported. Both mean (SD) diastolic (2.4 [7.8] mm Hg; P = 0.031) and systolic (2.4 [7.9] mm Hg; P = 0.029) blood pressures increased significantly from baseline to end point. Electrocardiography revealed a significant increase in mean (SD) heart rate (9.2 [11.6] bpm; P < 0.001) and a corresponding decrease in mean (SD) RR interval (-77.8 [98.2] ms; P < 0.001). Statistically significant, but mild, increases in diastolic pressure and heart rate were observed. CONCLUSION: These children and adolescent patients were successfully switched from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine treatment, with resulting improvement in ADHD symptom severity from baseline in this pilot study.

Efficacy and safety of atomoxetine in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and major depression.

This double-blind study examined efficacy and safety of atomoxetine (ATX; < or =1.8mg/kg per day) in adolescents aged 12-18 with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses of both attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and co-morbid major depressive disorder (MDD). Diagnoses were confirmed by the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version and persistently elevated scores on the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV, Parent version, Investigator-administered and -scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv, > or =1.5 standard deviations above age and gender norms) and Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R, > or = 40). Patients were treated for approximately 9 weeks with ATX (n = 72) or placebo (n = 70). Mean decrease in ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv total score was significantly greater in the ATX group (-13.3 +/- 10.0) compared with the placebo group (-5.1 +/- 9.9; p < 0.001). Mean CDRS-R score improvement was not significantly different between groups (ATX, -14.8 +/- 13.3; placebo, -12.8 +/- 10.4). Rates of treatment-emergent mania did not differ between groups (ATX, 0.0%; placebo, 1.5%). ATX treatment was associated with significantly more nausea and decreased appetite (p = 0.002; p = 0.003). No spontaneously reported adverse events involving suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior occurred in either group. ATX was an effective and safe treatment for ADHD in adolescents with ADHD and MDD. However, this trial showed no evidence for ATX of efficacy in treating MDD.

Long-Term, Open-Label, Safety Study of Edivoxetine Monotherapy in Children and Adolescents with Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess the long-term safety and tolerability of edivoxetine, a selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor, which was being developed as monotherapy in pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: This was an open-label study of edivoxetine once daily dosing (0.1-0.3 mg/kg) as treatment for ADHD in children (6-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) to assess safety for up to 5 years. The safety assessments included the incidence of adverse events, vital signs, electrocardiograms, laboratory tests, percentile changes in weight, height, and body mass index, and Tanner staging. Efficacy of treatment with edivoxetine was also assessed using the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-Version IV-Parent Reported: Investigator Scored (ADHDRS-IV) and Clinical Global Impressions-ADHD-Severity (CGI-ADHD-S). RESULTS: A total of 267 children and adolescents were enrolled and 20 completed the 5-year study. Most of the participants were male (70.4%) and white (67.4%), and the mean age was 11.6 years. Two hundred three participants (76.9%; N = 264) experienced at least one adverse event. Treatment-emergent adverse events reported in >10% of participants were headache, vomiting, nausea, and upper respiratory tract infection. Serious adverse events (SAEs) were reported by seven participants (2.7%) during study treatment periods, and one participant was diagnosed with suspect epilepsy during the follow-up period after discontinuation of edivoxetine. CONCLUSION: Long-term open-label treatment with edivoxetine as monotherapy in children and adolescents with ADHD revealed a safety profile that was consistent with its pharmacological effects on norepinephrine transmission and with that reported in short-term studies of edivoxetine. The study was terminated early due to slow enrollment and the very low number of 5-year completers. Lilly is not proceeding with further development of edivoxetine, as announced in 2013.

Efficacy outcomes from 3 clinical trials of edivoxetine as adjunctive treatment for patients with major depressive disorder who are partial responders to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment.

OBJECTIVE: Three studies examined whether edivoxetine (a highly selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor) had efficacy as adjunctive therapy for patients with major depressive disorder (DSM-IV-TR) who were partial responders to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) treatment of at least 6 weeks' duration. METHOD: Studies were 8-week randomized, placebo-controlled trials with a 3-week double-blind placebo lead-in phase, conducted from December 16, 2010, to October 21, 2013. Patients entered the double-blind adjunctive treatment phase if they met randomization criteria (< 25% improvement on Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] and MADRS total score ≥ 14); patients not randomized remained on adjunctive placebo. Study 1 compared fixed-dose edivoxetine (12 or 18 mg daily) + SSRI (N = 231 and N = 230, respectively) with placebo + SSRI (N = 240); study 2 compared flexible-dose edivoxetine (12-18 mg daily) + SSRI (N = 232) and fixed-dose edivoxetine (6 mg daily) + SSRI (N = 226) with placebo + SSRI (N = 231); and study 3 compared flexible-dose edivoxetine (12-18 mg daily) + SSRI (N = 230) with placebo + SSRI (N = 219). The primary outcome was mean change from randomization baseline to week 8 in MADRS total score, analyzed using repeated measures analysis. RESULTS: Each trial failed to meet the primary and most of the secondary objectives. The least-squares mean changes in MADRS total score were as follows-study 1: -8.5 (edivoxetine 12 mg + SSRI), -8.7 (edivoxetine 18 mg + SSRI), and -7.8 (placebo + SSRI); study 2: -9.4 (edivoxetine 12-18 mg + SSRI), -9.6 (edivoxetine 6 mg + SSRI), and -9.4 (placebo + SSRI); and study 3: -8.7 (edivoxetine 12-18 mg + SSRI) and -8.5 (placebo + SSRI). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive edivoxetine treatment for patients with major depressive disorder who were partial responders to SSRIs did not significantly improve efficacy outcomes. TRIALS REGISTRATIONS: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01173601, NCT01187407, NCT01185340.

Acute and longer-term safety results from a pooled analysis of duloxetine studies for the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess acute and longer-term safety of duloxetine in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD), a pooled analysis of data from two completed randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3, placebo- and active-controlled trials was undertaken. In these studies, neither duloxetine (investigational drug) nor fluoxetine (active control) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement compared with placebo on the primary efficacy measure. METHODS: Patients ages 7-17 years with MDD as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) received duloxetine (n=341), fluoxetine (n=234), or placebo (n=225) for 10 week acute and 26 week extended (duloxetine or fluoxetine only) treatments. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, vital signs, electrocardiograms, laboratory samples, and growth (height and weight) assessments. RESULTS: Significantly more patients discontinued because of adverse events during duloxetine (8.2%) treatment than during placebo (3.1%) treatment (p≤0.05). TEAEs in >10% of duloxetine-treated patients were headache and nausea. No completed suicides or deaths occurred. During acute treatment, 6.6% of duloxetine-, 8.0% of fluoxetine-, and 8.2% of placebo-treated patients had worsening suicidal ideation from baseline. Among patients initially randomized to duloxetine or fluoxetine who had suicidal ideation at study baseline, 81% of duloxetine- and 77% of fluoxetine-treated patients had improvements in suicidal ideation at end-point in the 36-week studies. Suicidal behavior occurred in two fluoxetine-treated patients and one placebo-treated patient during acute treatment, and in seven duloxetine-treated patients and one fluoxetine-treated patient during extended treatment. Duloxetine-treated patients had a mean pulse increase of ∼3 beats per minute, and mean blood pressure (both systolic and diastolic) increases of <2.0 mm Hg at week 36. Weight decrease (≥3.5%) during acute treatment occurred with statistically (p≤0.05) greater frequency for both the duloxetine (11.4%) and fluoxetine (11.5%) groups versus the placebo (5.5%) group; however, mean weight increase occurred for both duloxetine and fluoxetine groups during extended treatment. CONCLUSION: Results from this pooled analysis of two studies were consistent with the known safety and tolerability profile of duloxetine. Clinical Trial Registry Numbers: NCT00849901 and NCT00849693.

Safety and tolerability of edivoxetine as adjunctive treatment to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressants for patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this analysis was to assess the safety profile of edivoxetine as adjunctive treatment to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants. METHODS: A pooled analysis was conducted on data obtained from the integrated safety database of edivoxetine as adjunctive treatment to SSRIs. Safety and tolerability assessments included discontinuation rates, spontaneously reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), clinical laboratory tests, blood pressure (BP) and pulse, and electrocardiograms (ECGs). RESULTS: The analysis included 1260 patients treated with adjunctive edivoxetine and 806 treated with adjunctive placebo. Study completion rates were 85.2% and 84.5% (p=0.994), respectively. Discontinuations due to adverse events were 4.9% and 3.5% (p=0.07), respectively. Significantly more patients in the adjunctive edivoxetine group compared with adjunctive placebo group reported at least one TEAE (56.8 vs 43.7%, p<0.001). The most common TEAEs (occurred ≥5% frequency) were hyperhidrosis, nausea, and tachycardia. Mean changes in sitting BP and pulse at the last visit were increased significantly in patients treated with adjunctive edivoxetine compared with adjunctive placebo (SBP: 2.7 vs 0.5 mm Hg, p<0.001; DBP: 4.1 vs 0.8 mm Hg, p<0.001; pulse: 8.8 vs -1.3 bpm, p<0.001). There were no clinically significant changes in laboratory measures. CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability and safety profile of edivoxetine as adjunctive treatment to SSRI antidepressants was consistent with its norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor mechanism of action, and was comparable with edivoxetine monotherapy treatment in patients with major depressive disorder.

Meta-analysis of suicide-related behavior or ideation in child, adolescent, and adult patients treated with atomoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis examined suicide-related events in the acute phases of double-blind, placebo-controlled atomoxetine trials in pediatric and adult patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: A total of 3883 pediatric and 3365 adult patients were included. Potential events were identified from the adverse events database using a text-string search. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (MHRR) were calculated for potential suicide-related events categorized according to United States Food and Drug Administration defined codes. RESULTS: In this data set, no completed suicides were reported in the pediatric or adult populations. One pediatric (attempted suicide) (and no adult patient events) was categorized as suicidal behavior in the atomoxetine group. The frequency of combined suicidal behavior or ideation with atomoxetine treatment was 0.37% in pediatric patients (vs. 0.07% with placebo) and 0.11% in adults (vs. 0.12% with placebo) and the risk compared with placebo was not statistically significant (MHRR=1.57; p=0.42 and MHRR=0.96; p=0.96, respectively). In pediatric patients, suicidal ideation only was reported more frequently compared with placebo (MHRR=1.63; p=0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Overall in this data set, no completed suicides and 1 pediatric patient suicidal behavior event were reported in atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients. Suicidal ideation was uncommon among atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients, although it was reported more frequently in atomoxetine-treated pediatric patients compared with placebo; the reporting rate difference was not statistically significant. The MHRR of suicidal ideation was consistent with a previous meta-analysis of similar design. There was no evidence of increased risk for suicidal behavior in atomoxetine-treated pediatric or adult patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . The data reported are from an analysis of 23 pediatric and 9 adult clinical trials completed between 1998 and 2011. Ten pediatric (Studies HFBD, HFBK, LYAC, LYAS, LYAT, LYAW, LYAX, LYBG, LYBI, and LYBP) and two adult trials (Studies LYAA and LYAO) were conducted before the requirement to post trials at initiation (ongoing as of July 1, 2005) and, therefore, do not have a registration number. The registration numbers for the 13 pediatric trials meeting this requirement are: NCT00191698 (LYBX), NCT00486122 (LYCC), NCT00386581 (LYCZ), NCT00485459 (S010), NCT00191542 (LY15), NCT00191295 (LYBC), NCT00191906 (LYCK), NCT00192023 (LYCY), NCT00191945 (LYDM), NCT00546910 (LYDV), NCT00406354 (LYDW), NCT00380692 (S017), and NCT00607919 (LYEB). For the seven adult trials, the registration numbers are: NCT00190931 (LYBV), NCT00190957 (LYBY), NCT00190736 (LYCU), NCT00190775 (LYCW), NCT00190879 (LYDQ), NCT00510276 (LYDZ), and NCT00962104 (LYEE).

A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine fixed doses in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine fixed dose in the treatment of children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Patients (n=463) in this 36 week study (10 week acute and 26 week extension treatment) received duloxetine 60 mg QD (n=108), duloxetine 30 mg QD (n=116), fluoxetine 20 mg QD (n=117, active control), or placebo (n=122). Measures included: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: Neither active drug (duloxetine or fluoxetine) separated significantly (p<0.05) from placebo on mean change from baseline to end-point (10 weeks) on the CDRS-R total score. Total TEAEs and discontinuation for AEs were significantly (p<0.05) higher only for the duloxetine 60 mg group versus the placebo group during acute treatment. No clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) or laboratory abnormalities were observed, and no completed suicides or deaths occurred during the study. A total of 7 (6.7%) duloxetine 60 mg, 6 (5.2%) duloxetine 30 mg, 9 (8.0%) fluoxetine, and 11 (9.4%) placebo patients had worsening of suicidal ideation from baseline during acute treatment. Of the patients with suicidal ideation at baseline, 13/16 (81%) duloxetine 60 mg, 16/17 (94%) duloxetine 30 mg, 11/16 (69%) fluoxetine, and 13/15 (87%) placebo had improvement in suicidal ideation at end-point during acute treatment. One fluoxetine, one placebo, and six duloxetine patients had treatment-emergent suicidal behavior during the 36 week study. CONCLUSIONS: Trial results were inconclusive, as neither the investigational drug (duloxetine) nor the active control (fluoxetine) separated from placebo on the CDRS-R at 10 weeks. No new duloxetine safety signals were identified relative to those seen in adults. Clinical Trial Registry Number ( www.ClinicalTrials.gov ): NCT00849693.

A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine flexible dosing in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine flexible dose in children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Patients (n=337) in this 36 week study (10 week acute and 26 week extension treatment) received duloxetine (60-120 mg once daily [QD], n=117), fluoxetine (20-40 mg QD, n=117), or placebo (n=103). Measures included: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: Neither active drug (duloxetine or fluoxetine) separated significantly (p<0.05) from placebo on mean change from baseline to end-point (10 weeks) on the CDRS-R total score. There were no significant differences between the duloxetine or fluoxetine groups compared with placebo on serious AEs (SAEs), total TEAEs, or discontinuation for AE during acute treatment. There were no completed suicides or deaths, and no clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities observed during the study. One fluoxetine and one duloxetine patient experienced alanine aminotransferase (ALT) three or more times the upper limit of normal, which resolved during the study. A total of 8 (7.1%) duloxetine patients, 7 (6.8%) placebo patients, and 9 (8.0%) fluoxetine patients had worsening of suicidal ideation from baseline during acute treatment. Of the patients with suicidal ideation at baseline, 15/19 (79%) duloxetine, 19/19 (100%) placebo, and 16/19 (84%) fluoxetine had improvement in suicidal ideation at end-point during acute treatment. One duloxetine and two fluoxetine patients had treatment-emergent suicidal behavior during the 36 week study. CONCLUSION: Trial results were inconclusive, as neither the investigational drug (duloxetine) nor the active control (fluoxetine) separated from placebo on the CDRS-R at 10 weeks. No new duloxetine safety signals were identified relative to those seen in adults. Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00849901.

Prospective assessment of suicidal ideation and behavior: an internet survey of pharmaceutical sponsor practices.

OBJECTIVE: To survey the current approaches of clinical trial sponsors in prospective suicidal ideation and behavior assessments and challenges encountered. DESIGN: An internet-based survey. SETTING: Inclusion of prospective assessments of suicidal ideation and behavior in industry-sponsored clinical studies were required following the release of the September 2010 United States Federal Drug Administration draft guidance. The International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology Suicidal Ideation and Behavior Assessment Workgroup conducted an online survey to understand industry practices and experiences in implementing suicidal ideation and behavior assessments in clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to 1,447 industry employees at 178 pharmaceutical companies. A total of 89 evaluable responses, representing 39 companies, were obtained. MEASUREMENTS: A 30-item internet survey was developed asking about potential challenges and issues in implementing prospective suicidal ideation and behavior assessments. RESULTS: Common factors in deciding whether to include suicidal ideation and behavior assessments in a clinical trial were psychiatric or neurologic drug product (95%); central nervous system activity (78%); disease (74%) and patient population (71%); and regulatory announcements and policies (74%). The most common challenges in implementing suicidal ideation and behavior assessments included cross-cultural differences in acceptance of SIB assessments (40%); obtaining adequate baseline history (36.8%); obtaining translations (35%); investigator/rater discomfort with asking about suicidal ideation and behavior (32%); and inadequate training of raters to administer suicidal ideation and behavior ratings (30%). CONCLUSION: Among sponsors surveyed, the implementation rate of suicidal ideation and behavior assessment in central nervous systems studies is very high. Most have used the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Challenges regarding standardization of retrospective assessment timeframes and differing approaches to summarizing and analyzing suicidal ideation and behavior-related study data were frequently reported. These results suggest that inconsistent reports of suicidal ideation and behavior within study datasets may occur and that integration of data across studies remains a concern.