The STOP COVID 2 Study: Fluvoxamine vs Placebo for Outpatients With Symptomatic COVID-19, a Fully Remote Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background: Prior randomized clinical trials have reported benefit of fluvoxamine ≥200 mg/d vs placebo for patients infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, fully remote multisite clinical trial evaluated whether fluvoxamine prevents clinical deterioration in higher-risk outpatients with acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Between December 2020 and May 2021, nonhospitalized US and Canadian participants with confirmed symptomatic infection received fluvoxamine (50 mg on day 1, 100 mg twice daily thereafter) or placebo for 15 days. The primary modified intent-to-treat (mITT) population included participants who started the intervention within 7 days of symptom onset with a baseline oxygen saturation ≥92%. The primary outcome was clinical deterioration within 15 days of randomization, defined as having both (1) shortness of breath (severity ≥4 on a 0-10 scale or requiring hospitalization) and (2) oxygen saturation <92% on room air or need for supplemental oxygen. Results: A total of 547 participants were randomized and met mITT criteria (n = 272 fluvoxamine, n = 275 placebo). The Data Safety Monitoring Board recommended stopping early for futility related to lower-than-predicted event rates and declining accrual concurrent with vaccine availability in the United States and Canada. Clinical deterioration occurred in 13 (4.8%) participants in the fluvoxamine group and 15 (5.5%) participants in the placebo group (absolute difference at day 15, 0.68%; 95% CI, -3.0% to 4.4%; log-rank P = .91). Conclusions: This trial did not find fluvoxamine efficacious in preventing clinical deterioration in unvaccinated outpatients with symptomatic COVID-19. It was stopped early and underpowered due to low primary outcome rates. Clinical Trials Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04668950.

Long-term efficacy and safety of iloperidone: an update.

Schizophrenia is a devastating neuropsychiatric disease with a worldwide prevalence of approximately 0.5%-1%. Since many patients do not achieve adequate symptom relief from available agents, alternate pharmacotherapeutic approaches are needed. In this context, iloperidone was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of schizophrenia. This paper first reviews its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic profiles, emphasizing their clinical relevance. Next, it summarizes the literature on its acute and maintenance efficacy, safety, and tolerability. It then considers pharmacogenetic data which may help to predict response and risk of cardiac arrhythmias with this agent. Finally, it critically positions iloperidone relative to other first- and second-generation antipsychotics.

Quetiapine for the treatment of acute bipolar mania, mixed episodes and maintenance therapy.

INTRODUCTION: Bipolar disorder is characterized by mood instability, which can be challenging to manage. First-line pharmacological approaches usually involve lithium, anticonvulsants and antipsychotics. Over the past fifteen years, several second-generation antipsychotics have demonstrated benefits for various phases of this disorder. AREAS COVERED: This article examines the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of quetiapine ; its evidence base as an acute and maintenance monotherapy or adjunctive therapy for bipolar manic or mixed episodes is also discussed, along with the related issues of its safety and tolerability. EXPERT OPINION: In the context of bipolar disorder, quetiapine is the only agent approved as a monotherapy or adjunct therapy for acute manic/mixed episodes in adults and adolescents; as a monotherapy for acute depressive episodes in adults; and as an adjunctive maintenance therapy for bipolar I and II disorder in adults. In addition to its antipsychotic properties, this broad mood-stabilizing potential may simplify the management of select patients.

Quetiapine monotherapy for bipolar depression.

INTRODUCTION: Depression, in the context of bipolar disorder, is more prevalent than hypomania or mania and accounts for most of the disability. Furthermore, the treatment of bipolar depression is more complicated than the treatment of unipolar major depression. Finally, the evidence base for pharmacotherapy of bipolar depression is much smaller than for unipolar depression or hypomania/mania. AREAS COVERED: The article examines the mechanism of action and pharmacokinetics of quetiapine, its evidence base as a treatment for bipolar depression and related issues of safety and tolerability. EXPERT OPINION: In the context of bipolar disorder, quetiapine is the only monotherapy approved for the treatment of hypomania/mania, depression and as an adjunctive maintenance therapy. In addition to its antipsychotic properties, this broad mood stabilizing potential may uniquely benefit and simplify the management of some bipolar patients who can tolerate this agent.

Transcranial magnetic stimulation in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a comprehensive summary of safety experience from acute exposure, extended exposure, and during reintroduction treatment.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS) has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of major depressive disorder; however, prior studies have provided only partial safety information. We examined the acute efficacy of TMS in a randomized sham-controlled trial, under open-label conditions, and its durability of benefit. METHOD: Aggregate safety data were obtained from a comprehensive clinical development program examining the use of TMS in the treatment of major depressive disorder. There were 3 separate clinical protocols, including 325 patients from 23 clinical sites in the United States, Australia, and Canada. Active enrollment occurred between January 2004 and August 2005. Adverse events were assessed at each study visit by review of spontaneous reports with separate reporting of serious adverse events. Safety assessments were also completed for cognitive function and auditory threshold. Assessment of disease-specific risk included the potential for worsening of depressive symptoms. Finally, the time course and accommodation to the most commonly appearing adverse events were considered. RESULTS: TMS was administered in over 10,000 cumulative treatment sessions in the study program. There were no deaths or seizures. Most adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity. Transient headaches and scalp discomfort were the most common adverse events. Auditory threshold and cognitive function did not change. There was a low discontinuation rate (4.5%) due to adverse events during acute treatment. CONCLUSIONS: TMS was associated with a low incidence of adverse events that were mild to moderate in intensity and demonstrated a largely predictable time course of resolution. TMS may offer clinicians a novel, well-tolerated alternative for the treatment of major depressive disorder that can be safely administered in an outpatient setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00104611.