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.

Effects of adjunctive brexpiprazole on patient life engagement in major depressive disorder: Post hoc analysis of Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report data.

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes can capture domains that are meaningful to patients, such as life engagement in major depressive disorder (MDD), which reflects life fulfillment, well-being, and participation in valued and meaningful activities. This analysis investigated the effects of brexpiprazole adjunct to antidepressant treatment (ADT) on patient life engagement over the short and long term, using the 10-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (IDS-SR10) Life Engagement subscale. METHODS: Short-term data were pooled from three 6-week, randomized, double-blind studies of ADT + brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day versus ADT + placebo in adult outpatients with MDD (DSM-IV-TR criteria) and inadequate response to ADTs. Long-term data were from a 26-52-week, open-label extension study of ADT + brexpiprazole 0.5-3 mg/day. RESULTS: Over 6 weeks, ADT + brexpiprazole (n = 579) showed greater improvement in IDS-SR10 Life Engagement subscale score than ADT + placebo (n = 583), with a least squares mean difference of -1.19 (95% confidence limits: -1.78, -0.59; p = 0.0001; Cohen's d effect size: 0.23). Greater improvement for ADT + brexpiprazole versus ADT + placebo (p < 0.05) was also observed on eight life engagement items, with effect sizes ranging from 0.12 to 0.24. In the long-term study, mean (standard deviation) IDS-SR10 Life Engagement subscale score changed by -2.4 (4.9) points to Week 26 (n = 2047), and -3.7 (5.3) points to Week 52 (n = 768), with mean improvements on all ten items. CONCLUSIONS: Beyond its efficacy on depressive symptoms, adjunctive brexpiprazole may improve patient life engagement, thereby helping patients with MDD to achieve personally meaningful functional outcomes.

Assessment of patient life engagement in major depressive disorder using items from the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (IDS-SR).

BACKGROUND: Patient-reported outcomes can measure domains that are personally meaningful, such as life engagement, which reflects motivation, pleasure, and well-being. This study explored whether certain items from the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (IDS-SR) can capture patient life engagement in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: IDS-SR life engagement items were identified by a) a panel of expert psychiatrists (n = 4), b) patient interviews (n = 20), and c) a principal component analysis (PCA) to explore clustering of items. Psychometric analyses were performed on potential subscales, and a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) was estimated by anchor- and distribution-based methods. IDS-SR data were obtained from three randomized controlled trials of adjunctive brexpiprazole in MDD. RESULTS: Expert psychiatrists selected 10 items by consensus from the IDS-SR that might capture patient life engagement (Cronbach's alpha, 0.82; item-total correlations, 0.36-0.58). Patient interviews identified 13 items as moderately to very relevant to life engagement (Cronbach's alpha, 0.85; item-total correlations, 0.35-0.61). The PCA revealed a cluster that included all 10 items selected by psychiatrists and 11 items identified by patients. Expert psychiatrists intentionally distinguished life engagement and core depressive symptoms, although patient insights and the PCA indicated that these aspects of MDD are strongly linked. The 10-item IDS-SR life engagement subscale had an MCID of 3-5 points. CONCLUSIONS: Different approaches consistently identified a subset of 10 IDS-SR items that can measure life engagement in MDD, which may be suitable to group into an IDS-SR life engagement subscale.

Are self-reported and self-monitored adherence good proxies for reaching relevant plasma concentrations?: Experiences from a study of anti-depressants in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The use of electronic-based devices to measure and to improve adherence of subjects in clinical trials is increasing. AiCure has developed a mobile technology that is claimed to provide visual confirmation of drug ingestion. While there is evidence suggesting that including such self-monitoring device in a study increases adherence, the quality of the data produced by the device may be questionable. Can the mobile technology reliably distinguish whether a subject takes the study drug or not? METHODS: Adherence was calculated based on exposure, self-reporting and self-monitoring for subjects randomized to an anti-depressant. Levels of adherence and agreement between the three approaches were investigated based on calculation of proportions, two-way tables and receiver operating curves. RESULTS: A total of 214 subjects had measured concentrations of study drug at all three time points (end of weeks 3, 4 and 5), along with adherence data to define proportion of days adherent based on self-reporting and the self-monitoring instrument developed by AiCure. Self-reported adherence proportions were higher than self-monitored adherence proportions, although both were high (>90%). Neither self-reported and self-monitored adherence agreed with exposure-based adherence. CONCLUSION: Both self-reported and self-monitored adherence overestimated adherence. Neither the self-reported nor the self-monitored adherence measure reflected subjects' actual adherence. This prompts for cautiousness when interpreting either of them, and it underlines the need for thorough validation of electronic devices and software that claims to measure adherence. The AiCure instrument may not be able to reliably determine whether the subjects swallow the study medication.

Patient-reported depression severity and cognitive symptoms as determinants of functioning in patients with major depressive disorder: a secondary analysis of the 2-year prospective PERFORM study.

PURPOSE: To investigate the temporal interrelationship between depression severity, cognitive symptoms, and functioning in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) in the PERFORM study (NCT01427439). PATIENTS AND METHODS: PERFORM was a 2-year, multicenter, prospective, noninterventional cohort study in outpatients with MDD who were either initiating antidepressant monotherapy or undergoing their first switch of antidepressant. Patients were enrolled by a general practitioner or psychiatrist. Structural equation model (SEM) analysis was used to explore temporal associations between patient-reported depression severity (9-item Patient Health Questionnaire score), cognitive symptoms (5-item Perceived Deficits Questionnaire score), and functional impairment (Sheehan Disability Scale total score). Standardized regression coefficients (SRCs) were used to evaluate the relationship between each outcome and scores from the most recent prior visit over the 2 years of follow-up. RESULTS: Between February 25, 2011, and February 19, 2015, 1,159 eligible patients with MDD completed the baseline and ≥1 follow-up visit at 194 sites in five European countries (France, Germany, Spain, Sweden, and the UK). Overall, 1,090 patients had assessments for ≥1 outcome measure at two consecutive visits. Severity of cognitive symptoms at baseline and Months 2 and 18 predicted functional impairment at Months 2, 6, and 24, respectively (SRC: 0.18, 0.15, and 0.22; P<0.001). Depression severity at Months 2, 6, and 12 predicted functional impairment at Months 6, 12, and 18, respectively (SRC: 0.17, 0.25, and 0.22; P<0.001). Severity of cognitive symptoms at baseline and Month 18 predicted depression severity at Months 2 and 24, respectively (SRC: 0.19 and 0.22; P<0.001). Functional impairment did not significantly predict the severity of depression or cognitive symptoms, and depression severity did not significantly predict the severity of cognitive symptoms at any time point. CONCLUSION: Patient-reported severity of cognitive symptoms appears to be an independent and significant determinant of subsequent functional impairment and depression severity in patients with MDD.

A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Effects of Various Antidepressant Classes on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) as a Measure of Cognitive Dysfunction in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

Background: Major depressive disorder is a common condition that often includes cognitive dysfunction. A systematic literature review of studies and a network meta-analysis were carried out to assess the relative effect of antidepressants on cognitive dysfunction in major depressive disorder. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane, CDSR, and PsychINFO databases; clinical trial registries; and relevant conference abstracts were searched for randomized controlled trials assessing the effects of antidepressants/placebo on cognition. A network meta-analysis comparing antidepressants was conducted using a random effects model. Results: The database search retrieved 11337 citations, of which 72 randomized controlled trials from 103 publications met the inclusion criteria. The review identified 86 cognitive tests assessing the effect of antidepressants on cognitive functioning. However, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test, which targets multiple domains of cognition and is recognized as being sensitive to change, was the only test that was used across 12 of the included randomized controlled trials and that allowed the construction of a stable network suitable for the network meta-analysis. The interventions assessed included selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, and other non-selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors. The network meta-analysis using the Digit Symbol Substitution Test showed that vortioxetine was the only antidepressant that improved cognitive dysfunction on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test vs placebo {standardized mean difference: 0.325 (95% CI = 0.120; 0.529, P=.009}. Compared with other antidepressants, vortioxetine was statistically more efficacious on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test vs escitalopram, nortriptyline, and the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and tricyclic antidepressant classes. Conclusions: This study highlighted the large variability in measures used to assess cognitive functioning. The findings on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test indicate differential effects of various antidepressants on improving cognitive function in patients with major depressive disorder.

PREDICTING LATENT CLASS SCORES FOR SUBSEQUENT ANALYSIS.

Latent class regression models relate covariates and latent constructs such as psychiatric disorders. Though full maximum likelihood estimation is available, estimation is often in three steps: (i) a latent class model is fitted without covariates; (ii) latent class scores are predicted; and (iii) the scores are regressed on covariates. We propose a new method for predicting class scores that, in contrast to posterior probability-based methods, yields consistent estimators of the parameters in the third step. Additionally, in simulation studies the new methodology exhibited only a minor loss of efficiency. Finally, the new and the posterior probability-based methods are compared in an analysis of mobility/exercise.