Brexpiprazole for the Treatment of Agitation in Alzheimer Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Agitation is a prevalent, distressing, and burdensome manifestation of Alzheimer dementia in need of an efficacious, safe, and well-tolerated treatment. Objective: To confirm the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole in patients with agitation in Alzheimer dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: This randomized clinical trial was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fixed-dose, parallel-arm trial that ran from May 2018 to June 2022 at 123 clinical trial sites in Europe and the United States. Participants included patients with agitation in Alzheimer dementia in a care facility or community-based setting. Stable Alzheimer disease medications were permitted. Interventions: In this 2-arm trial, patients were randomized to receive oral brexpiprazole or placebo (2:1 ratio) for 12 weeks. Within the brexpiprazole arm, patients were further randomized to receive fixed doses of 2 mg/d or 3 mg/d in a 1:2 ratio. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was change in Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory total score (which measures the frequency of 29 agitated behaviors) from baseline to week 12 for brexpiprazole, 2 or 3 mg, vs placebo. Safety was assessed by standard measures, including treatment-emergent adverse events. Results: A total of 345 patients were randomized to receive brexpiprazole (n = 228) or placebo (n = 117); completion rates were 198 (86.8%) for brexpiprazole and 104 (88.9%) for placebo. Mean (SD) age was 74.0 (7.5) years, and 195 of 345 patients were female (56.5%). Patients receiving brexpiprazole, 2 or 3 mg (n = 225), demonstrated statistically significantly greater improvement than those taking placebo (n = 116) in Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory total score from baseline to week 12 (brexpiprazole baseline, 80.6, mean change, -22.6; placebo baseline, 79.2, mean change, -17.3; least-squares mean difference, -5.32; 95% CI, -8.77 to -1.87; P = .003; Cohen d effect size, 0.35). No treatment-emergent adverse events had an incidence of 5% or more with brexpiprazole and greater incidence than placebo. The proportion of patients who discontinued because of adverse events was 12 of 226 (5.3%) for brexpiprazole and 5 of 116 (4.3%) for placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: In this study, patients with Alzheimer dementia who took brexpiprazole, 2 or 3 mg, showed a statistically significant improvement vs placebo in agitation over 12 weeks. Brexpiprazole was generally well tolerated over 12 weeks in this vulnerable patient population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03548584.

Defining Clinical Trial Estimands: A Practical Guide for Study Teams with Examples Based on a Psychiatric Disorder.

While the ICH E9(R1) Addendum on "Estimands and Sensitivity Analysis in Clinical Trials" was released in late 2019, the widespread implementation of defining and reporting estimands across clinical trials is still in progress and the engagement of non-statistical functions in this process is also in progress. Case studies are sought after, especially those with documented clinical and regulatory feedback. This paper describes an interdisciplinary process for implementing the estimand framework, devised by the Estimands and Missing Data Working Group (a group with clinical, statistical, and regulatory representation) of the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology. This process is illustrated by specific examples using various types of hypothetical trials evaluating a treatment for major depressive disorder. Each of the estimand examples follows the same template and features all steps of the proposed process, including identifying the trial stakeholder(s), the decisions they need to make about the investigated treatment in their specific role and the questions that would support their decision making. Each of the five strategies for handling intercurrent events are addressed in at least one example; the featured endpoints are also diverse, including continuous, binary and time to event. Several examples are presented that include specifications for a potential trial design, key trial implementation elements needed to address the estimand, and main and sensitivity estimator specifications. Ultimately this paper highlights the need to incorporate multi-disciplinary collaborations into implementing the ICH E9(R1) framework.

Consistency checks to improve measurement with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A).

BACKGROUND: Mitigating rating inconsistency can improve measurement fidelity and detection of treatment response. METHODS: The International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology convened an expert Working Group that developed consistency checks for ratings of the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and Clinical Global Impression of Severity of anxiety (CGIS) that are widely used in studies of mood and anxiety disorders. Flags were applied to 40,349 HAM-A administrations from 15 clinical trials and to Monte Carlo-simulated data as a proxy for applying flags under conditions of inconsistency. RESULTS: Thirty-three flags were derived these included logical consistency checks and statistical outlier-response pattern checks. Twenty-percent of the HAM-A administrations had at least one logical scoring inconsistency flag, 4 % had two or more. Twenty-six percent of the administrations had at least one statistical outlier flag and 11 % had two or more. Overall, 35 % of administrations had at least one flag of any type, 19 % had one and 16 % had 2 or more. Most of administrations in the Monte Carlo- simulated data raised multiple flags. LIMITATIONS: Flagged ratings may represent less-common presentations of administrations done correctly. Conclusions-Application of flags to clinical ratings may aid in detecting imprecise measurement. Flags can be used for monitoring of raters during an ongoing trial and as part of post-trial evaluation. Appling flags may improve reliability and validity of trial data.

Effects of Brexpiprazole on Functioning in Patients With Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies.

Objective: To evaluate the short- and long-term effects of brexpiprazole on patient functioning in schizophrenia.Methods: Data were included from three 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies (hospitalized patients); a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled maintenance treatment study (terminated early by the study sponsor based on the positive result of an interim analysis); and two 52-week, open-label extension studies-all in patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria) and conducted from July 2011-February 2016. Patients allocated to oral brexpiprazole received 2-4 mg/d (short-term studies) or 1-4 mg/d (long-term studies). Functioning was measured using the Personal and Social Performance (PSP) and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) scales, with response defined as a PSP/GAF increase of ≥ 10 points and remission as PSP score ≥ 71 or GAF score ≥ 61.Results: Patients receiving brexpiprazole (n = 831) showed greater improvement than those receiving placebo (n = 490) from baseline to week 6 in PSP score (least squares mean difference, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 1.82-4.58; P < .0001; Cohen d = 0.31) and in all 4 PSP domains. At week 52 of the maintenance study (which had a low completion rate primarily due to the early termination), GAF functional remission was achieved by 65.3% (62/95) of stabilized patients randomized to brexpiprazole and 47.1% (48/102) of stabilized patients randomized to placebo, with a number needed to treat of 6 (95% confidence interval, 4-22; P = .0076). At week 52 of the open-label studies (n = 177), PSP functional response and remission were achieved by 84.2% and 41.8% of patients receiving brexpiprazole, respectively.Conclusions: Although limited by the lack of an active comparator, analyses of this large dataset demonstrate that brexpiprazole treatment is associated with clinically relevant improvement in functioning among patients with schizophrenia, in the short term and long term.Trial Registration: Data used in this post hoc analysis were from studies with ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01396421, NCT01393613, NCT01810380, NCT01668797, NCT01397786, and NCT01810783.

Consistency checks to improve measurement with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D).

BACKGROUND: Symptom manifestations in mood disorders can be subtle. Cumulatively, small imprecisions in measurement can limit our ability to measure treatment response accurately. Logical and statistical consistency checks between item responses (i.e., cross-sectionally) and across administrations (i.e., longitudinally) can contribute to improving measurement fidelity. METHODS: The International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology convened an expert Working Group that assembled flags indicating consistency/inconsistency ratings for the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D17), a widely-used rating scale in studies of depression. Proposed flags were applied to assessments derived from the NEWMEDS data repository of 95,468 HAM-D administrations from 32 registration trials of antidepressant medications and to Monte Carlo-simulated data as a proxy for applying flags under conditions of known inconsistency. RESULTS: Two types of flags were derived: logical consistency checks and statistical outlier-response pattern checks. Almost thirty percent of the HAMD administrations had at least one logical scoring inconsistency flag. Seven percent had flags judged to suggest that a thorough review of rating is warranted. Almost 22% of the administrations had at least one statistical outlier flag and 7.9% had more than one. Most of the administrations in the Monte Carlo- simulated data raised multiple flags. LIMITATIONS: Flagged ratings may represent less-common presentations of administrations done correctly. CONCLUSIONS: Application of flags to clinical ratings may aid in detecting imprecise measurement. Reviewing and addressing these flags may improve reliability and validity of clinical trial data.

Effects of Brexpiprazole Across Symptom Domains in Patients With Schizophrenia: Post Hoc Analysis of Short- and Long-Term Studies.

The successful treatment of schizophrenia entails improvement across a spectrum of symptoms. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to characterize the short- and long-term effects of brexpiprazole on Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) 'Marder factors.' Data were included from three 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies; a 52-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled maintenance treatment study; and two 52-week open-label extension (OLEx) studies-all in schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria). Patients receiving oral brexpiprazole were dosed at 2-4 mg/day (short-term studies) or 1-4 mg/day (long-term studies). At Week 6, least squares mean differences (LSMDs, with 95% confidence limits [CLs]) for brexpiprazole (n = 868) vs placebo (n = 517) were: Positive symptoms: -1.55 (-2.30, -0.80), P < .0001, Cohen's d effect size (ES) = 0.27; Negative symptoms: -1.12 (-1.63, -0.61), P < .0001, ES = 0.29; Disorganized thought: -1.26 (-1.78, -0.74), P < .0001, ES = 0.32; Uncontrolled hostility/excitement: -0.76 (-1.15, -0.37), P = .0002, ES = 0.26; Anxiety/ depression: -0.56 (-0.91, -0.22), P = .0014, ES = 0.22. At last visit of the maintenance study, LSMDs (95% CLs) for brexpiprazole (n = 96) vs placebo (n = 104) were: Positive symptoms: -3.44 (-4.99, -1.89), P < .0001, ES = 0.62; Negative symptoms: -1.23 (-2.52, 0.07), P = .063, ES = 0.27; Disorganized thought: -1.69 (-2.81, -0.56), P = .0035, ES = 0.42; Uncontrolled hostility/excitement: -1.26 (-2.12, -0.39), P = .0046, ES = 0.41; Anxiety/depression: -0.72 (-1.47, 0.03), P = .061, ES = 0.27. In the OLEx studies, improvements were maintained over 58 (6 + 52) weeks of brexpiprazole treatment. In conclusion, these data suggest that brexpiprazole treats the continuum of schizophrenia symptoms, in the short- and long-term. Trial Registration: Data used in this post hoc analysis came from ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01396421, NCT01393613, NCT01810380, NCT01668797, NCT01397786, NCT01810783.

Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and one open-label, long-term trial of brexpiprazole for the acute treatment of bipolar mania.

BACKGROUND: Brexpiprazole is a dopamine/serotonin receptor partial agonist (D2, 5-HT1A) and antagonist (5-HT2A) approved for treatment of schizophrenia and major depressive disorder (adjunct to antidepressants). AIMS: This study aimed to investigate brexpiprazole as monotherapy in acute mania (bipolar I disorder) in two short-term (ST) studies (study 080 and study 081) and one open-label (OL) extension (study 083). METHODS: ST studies were three-week randomized, double-blind, flexible dose (2-4 mg/day), placebo-controlled studies. The primary endpoint was mean change in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score from baseline to day 21. The OL study was a 26-week flexible dose (2-4 mg/day) study for patients completing the ST studies. RESULTS: A total of 164 and 158 (study 080) and 170 and 162 (study 081) inpatients with DSM-5 mania with/without mixed features were randomized to placebo or brexpiprazole, respectively. The primary analyses did not show a statistically significant difference between brexpiprazole and placebo: study 080: least squares mean difference (95% confidence limits): 0.14 (-1.74, 2.03), p = 0.8797; study 081: -1.62 (-3.56, 0.32), p = 0.1011. OL study patients (n = 381) demonstrated a gradual improvement in YMRS total score. Akathisia was the only adverse event, with an incidence of ⩾5% with brexpiprazole and more than placebo in the ST studies, or ⩾5% in the OL study. Brexpiprazole was more efficacious in patients with impaired or no insight (predominantly EU patients) than in patients with excellent insight (predominantly US patients). CONCLUSIONS: Further studies are necessary to address the potential efficacy of brexpiprazole in acute mania, which should ensure that the study sample is severe enough (especially with regard to insight), and that the dose/titration schedule is not too modest.

A Long-Term, Open-Label Study to Evaluate the Safety and Tolerability of Brexpiprazole as Adjunctive Therapy in Adults With Major Depressive Disorder.

BACKGROUND: Long-term treatment is recommended in major depressive disorder (MDD) to prevent relapse and to restore functioning. The aim of this study (Orion; NCT01360866) was to assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of open-label treatment with adjunctive brexpiprazole in adult patients with MDD. METHODS: Patients rolled over into this 52-week study (amended to 26 weeks) from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. Patients received brexpiprazole 0.5 to 3 mg/d (flexible dose) adjunct to their current antidepressant treatment. The primary outcome variable was the frequency and severity of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Efficacy was assessed as a secondary objective using clinical rating scales. RESULTS: A total of 2944 patients were enrolled (1547 for 52 weeks, 1397 for 26 weeks), of whom 1895 (64.4%) completed the study. The TEAEs with incidence of 5% or greater were weight increase (17.7%), somnolence (8.0%), headache (7.2%), akathisia (6.7%), increased appetite (6.3%), insomnia (6.3%), fatigue (6.1%), viral upper respiratory tract infection (5.4%), and anxiety (5.2%). Most TEAEs were mild or moderate in severity. The mean increase in body weight was 2.7 kg to week 26 and 3.2 kg to week 52; 25.8% of patients had a weight increase of 7% or greater at any postbaseline visit. There were no clinically relevant findings related to extrapyramidal symptoms, prolactin, lipids, or glucose. Patients' symptoms and functioning showed continual improvement. CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive treatment with open-label brexpiprazole 0.5 to 3 mg/d was generally well tolerated for up to 52 weeks in patients with MDD and was associated with continued improvement in efficacy measures and functional outcomes.

A randomised, placebo-controlled 24-week study evaluating adjunctive brexpiprazole in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate brexpiprazole adjunctive to antidepressant therapies (ADTs) as maintenance treatment in patients with major depressive disorder with inadequate response to ADT, utilising a novel study design. METHODS: The study comprised an 8-week prospective treatment period with open-label ADT with double-blind placebo treatment and a 24-week randomised treatment period. Investigators and patients were blinded to treatment periods, randomisation criteria, and timing of randomisation. Patients with early response to open-label ADT were withdrawn at Week 6. Patients fulfilling criteria for inadequate response were randomised to ADT+brexpiprazole 1-3 mg/day, or ADT+placebo. The primary endpoint was full remission: Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≤10 and ≥50% decrease from randomisation (i.e. baseline) in MADRS total score for at least 8 consecutive weeks. RESULTS: The primary efficacy analysis failed to show a statistically significant difference between the proportions of patients on ADT+brexpiprazole (21.4%) and ADT+placebo (24.9%) achieving full remission; odds ratio: 0.83; p=0.2641. The secondary endpoint of change from baseline to Week 6 in MADRS total score showed no difference between ADT+brexpiprazole and ADT+placebo (-0.4; p=0.3259). The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) in patients receiving ADT+brexpiprazole was weight increased (9.5% vs. 5.0% in ADT+placebo). The incidence of TEAEs leading to withdrawal in the randomised treatment period was 6.3% in the ADT+brexpiprazole group and 3.4% in the ADT+placebo group. CONCLUSION: Adjunctive brexpiprazole did not differentiate from ADT+placebo on the primary endpoint of full remission. A number of design elements in this previously untried study design may have contributed to the study result. Brexpiprazole was well tolerated.

Adjunctive brexpiprazole for elderly patients with major depressive disorder: An open-label, long-term safety and tolerability study.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the long-term safety and tolerability of flexible-dose brexpiprazole adjunct to antidepressant treatment (ADT) in elderly patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Elderly patients (≥65 years) with MDD and inadequate response to ≥1 ADT during the current episode were recruited to a 26-week, interventional, open-label study (NCT02400346) at outpatient centers in the USA and Europe. All patients received brexpiprazole 1 to 3 mg/day adjunct to their current ADT. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), movement disorder scales, and standard safety assessments (vital signs, laboratory safety parameters, physical examination, electrocardiograms). Exploratory efficacy outcomes included the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S), and Social Adaptation Self-Evaluation Scale (SASS). RESULTS: Of the 132 treated patients, 88 (66.7%) completed the study and 44 (33.3%) withdrew, including 24 who withdrew because of AEs (18.2%). Overall, 102 patients (77.3%) experienced ≥1 treatment-emergent AE (TEAE), which were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Treatment-emergent AEs with the highest incidence were fatigue (15.2%) and restlessness (12.9%). The most common TEAE leading to withdrawal was fatigue (3.0%). No consistent clinically relevant findings were seen with regard to movement disorder scales or standard safety assessments. Mean (standard error) efficacy score changes from baseline to week 26 were: MADRS total, -14.5 (0.9); CGI-S, -1.8 (0.1); and SASS, 3.2 (0.5). CONCLUSIONS: Long-term (26-week) treatment with adjunctive brexpiprazole was generally well tolerated in elderly patients with MDD and inadequate response to prior ADT. Improvements were observed in depressive symptoms and social functioning.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Fixed-Dose Brexpiprazole 2 mg/d as Adjunctive Treatment of Adults With Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole as adjunct to antidepressant treatment (ADT) in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and inadequate response to ADTs. METHODS: Outpatients with inadequate response to 1-3 ADTs during their current depressive episode (DSM-IV-TR criteria) were administered prospective, open-label ADT. Those patients with inadequate response to prospective ADT were randomized to double-blind, adjunctive brexpiprazole 2 mg/d or placebo. The primary efficacy end point was the change from baseline (randomization) to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Key secondary efficacy end points were the change in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) mean score for all patients and the change in MADRS total score for subgroups with minimal response to prospective ADT and DSM-5-defined anxious distress. The study was conducted from July 2014 to May 2016. RESULTS: Adjunctive brexpiprazole (n = 191) improved MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 versus placebo (n = 202; least squares mean difference [95% confidence limits]: -2.30 [-3.97, -0.62]; P = .0074). There was no separation between groups for the SDS mean score (-0.22 [-0.66, 0.23]; P = .33). Adjunctive brexpiprazole also improved MADRS total score versus placebo in the subgroups with minimal response to prospective ADT (-2.25 [-4.23, -0.27]; P = .026) and anxious distress (-2.98 [-5.24, -0.72]; P = .0099). Treatment with adjunctive brexpiprazole was well tolerated with no unexpected side effects. CONCLUSIONS: This study adds to the substantial body of evidence for the efficacy and tolerability of brexpiprazole as adjunctive treatment in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02196506; EudraCT number: 2014-000062-22​​​.

Efficacy and safety of flexibly dosed brexpiprazole for the adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder: a randomized, active-referenced, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole as adjunctive treatment in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) and an inadequate response to prior antidepressant treatment (ADT). METHODS: Patients with a current major depressive episode after prior treatment with 1-3 ADTs entered an 8- or 10-week prospective treatment phase in which they received double-blind placebo adjunct to open-label ADT. Inadequate responders were randomized (2:2:1) to brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day, placebo, or quetiapine extended-release (XR) 150-300 mg/day, adjunct to the same ADT, for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline (randomization) to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. The key secondary efficacy endpoint was the change in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) mean score. RESULTS: Adjunctive brexpiprazole showed a greater improvement in MADRS total score than adjunctive placebo (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval] = -1.48 [-2.56, -0.39]; p = .0078), whereas adjunctive quetiapine XR did not separate from placebo (-0.30 [-1.63, 1.04]; p = .66). Adjunctive brexpiprazole failed to separate from placebo on the SDS mean score (-0.23 [-0.52, 0.07]; p = .13), but did improve functioning on two of the three SDS items (family life and social life). The most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events in patients receiving brexpiprazole were akathisia (6.1%), somnolence (5.6%), and headache (5.6%). CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day improved symptoms of depression compared with adjunctive placebo in patients with MDD and an inadequate response to ADTs, and was well tolerated with no unexpected side effects.