Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 6 de 6
Filter
1.
Eur Neuropsychopharmacol ; 61: 4-14, 2022 08.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35704951

ABSTRACT

Lu AF11167 is a selective, high-affinity inhibitor of PDE10A that modulates dopamine D1 and D2 receptor-mediated intraneuronal signalling without binding to these receptors. This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled study (NCT03793712) with open-label extension (NCT03929497) evaluated the efficacy of two fixed-flexible doses (1-2mg/day and 3-4mg/day) of Lu AF11167 in stable, non-acute patients with schizophrenia and persistent prominent negative symptoms. The studies were discontinued following a futility analysis of the double-blind study, and we report data collected up to study termination. Of the 210 patients screened, 162 were randomized, 111 completed the double-blind study and 96 entered the open-label study before early termination. The withdrawal rate due to impending relapse was low and comparable across treatment groups (n = 2-4 per group in the double-blind study and n = 1 in the open-label extension). Double-blind treatment with Lu AF11167 3-4mg was not superior to placebo in the reduction of Brief Negative Symptom Scale (BNSS) total scores from Baseline to Week 12 (primary endpoint); adjusted mean changes were -6.8 with placebo, -5.7 with Lu AF11167 1-2 mg group and -6.0 with Lu AF11167 3-4mg. Treatment with Lu AF11167 1-2mg also failed to separate from placebo on the primary endpoint. Neither dose group showed significant improvements versus placebo on any of the secondary efficacy measures exploring effect of treatment on overall symptomology, negative symptoms, positive symptoms, or functioning. Administration of Lu AF11167 was safe and well tolerated and adverse events were not a major reason for withdrawal from the study.


Subject(s)
Antipsychotic Agents , Schizophrenia , Antipsychotic Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Humans , Phosphoric Diester Hydrolases/therapeutic use , Proof of Concept Study , Schizophrenia/chemically induced , Schizophrenia/drug therapy , Treatment Outcome
2.
J Child Adolesc Psychopharmacol ; 27(6): 526-534, 2017 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28333546

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and tolerability of single and multiple doses of vortioxetine in children and adolescents with a depressive or anxiety disorder and to provide supportive information for appropriate dosing regimens for pediatric clinical trials. METHODS: This prospective, open-label, multinational, multisite, multiple-dose trial enrolled 48 patients (children and adolescents; 1:1 ratio) divided into 8 cohorts (4 adolescent and 4 child), with each cohort including 6 patients. The cohorts in each age group were assigned to receive one of four dosing regimens: vortioxetine 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg q.d. for 14 days. The total treatment period lasted 14-20 days with patients in the higher dose cohorts uptitrated over 2-6 days. Plasma samples for PK analysis were obtained on the first and last days of dosing. RESULTS: Among children and adolescents, respectively, 62% and 92% had depression and 58% and 33% had anxiety disorder. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was present in 50% of children and 38% of adolescents. After 14 days q.d. at the target dose, the PK of vortioxetine concentrations was generally proportional to the dose in both age groups. Exposure, as assessed by maximum plasma concentrations and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours, was 30%-40% lower in adolescents than in children. There was no significant relationship between sex, height, or ADHD diagnosis and PK parameters. Most adverse events were mild in severity and consistent with those seen in adults. CONCLUSION: The results suggest that the dosages of vortioxetine evaluated (5-20 mg q.d.; approved for treatment in adults) and the uptitration schedule used are appropriate for pediatric efficacy and safety trials.


Subject(s)
Anti-Anxiety Agents/adverse effects , Anti-Anxiety Agents/pharmacokinetics , Piperazines/adverse effects , Piperazines/pharmacokinetics , Sulfides/adverse effects , Sulfides/pharmacokinetics , Adolescent , Anti-Anxiety Agents/blood , Anti-Anxiety Agents/therapeutic use , Anxiety Disorders/blood , Anxiety Disorders/drug therapy , Anxiety Disorders/epidemiology , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/blood , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/drug therapy , Attention Deficit Disorder with Hyperactivity/epidemiology , Child , Comorbidity , Depressive Disorder/blood , Depressive Disorder/drug therapy , Depressive Disorder/epidemiology , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Male , Piperazines/blood , Piperazines/therapeutic use , Sulfides/blood , Sulfides/therapeutic use , Vortioxetine
3.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 36(5): 453-6, 2016 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27525966

ABSTRACT

Our objective was to validate the different versions of the Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) both psychometrically (scalability) and clinically in discriminating antidepressants from placebo in terms of remission rates in an 8-week clinical trial in the acute treatment of major depression. The traditional HAM-D17 version was compared with the shorter HAM-D6 and the longer HAM-D21 or HAM-D24 in a fixed-dose placebo-controlled vortioxetine study. Clinical Global Impression of Severity scores were used to establish standardized cutoff scores for remission across each scale. Using these cutoff scores, we compared the ability of each scale to separate drug-placebo remission rates, evaluated by the number needed to treat for clinical evidence. The HAM-D6 was superior to HAM-D17 in separating drug-placebo remission rates at the end point, defined as number needed to treat of less than 10. More items in the longer HAM-D versions indicated smaller discriminating validity over placebo. The HAM-D6 indicated a dose effect on remission for vortioxetine in both moderate and severe major depression. The brief HAM-D6 was thus found superior to HAM-D17, HAM-D21, and HAM-D24 both in terms of scalability and in discriminating antidepressants from placebo.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents/pharmacology , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales/standards , Adult , Antidepressive Agents/administration & dosage , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Remission Induction , Reproducibility of Results
4.
Int Psychogeriatr ; 25(6): 919-27, 2013 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23472619

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Agitation and aggression in Alzheimer's disease (AD) are amongst the most serious of neuropsychiatric symptoms, and contribute to poor outcomes and worse quality of life. Previous studies have suggested a benefit for memantine on agitation and aggression, but none have examined its efficacy in community-dwelling patients with significant agitation and aggression at baseline, utilizing these behaviors as a primary outcome measure. METHODS: Patients with moderate-to-severe AD with Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) total score ≥13 and NPI agitation/aggression score ≥1 were randomized to placebo or 20-mg memantine in a double-blind, 24-week trial. Co-primary outcome measures were behavior, measured by total NPI score, and cognition, using the Severe Impairment Battery (SIB). Secondary outcome measures included global assessment, function and other measures of behavior. This trial was registered as Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00857649. RESULTS: A total of 369 patients (average age = 75, average MMSE = 12) were randomized to placebo or memantine. The study was prematurely terminated due to recruitment problems. There were no statistically significant differences between memantine and placebo in mean change from baseline in NPI, SIB, or any of the secondary outcome measures. Behavior improved in both groups (total NPI change scores -3.90 ± 1.24 for memantine and -5.13 ± 1.23 for placebo). Memantine was generally well tolerated and patient retention in both treatment arms was good. CONCLUSIONS: The study failed to show the superiority of memantine in this sample of patients with moderate-to-severe AD with significant baseline agitation and aggression. Methodological limitations could have contributed to these results.


Subject(s)
Aggression/psychology , Alzheimer Disease/drug therapy , Antiparkinson Agents/therapeutic use , Memantine/therapeutic use , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Aggression/drug effects , Alzheimer Disease/complications , Alzheimer Disease/psychology , Antiparkinson Agents/adverse effects , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Memantine/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Neuropsychological Tests , Prospective Studies , Psychomotor Agitation/drug therapy , Psychomotor Agitation/etiology , Psychomotor Agitation/psychology , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome
5.
J Clin Psychopharmacol ; 26(3): 311-5, 2006 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16702897

ABSTRACT

In a European, multicenter, double-blind study, 244 adolescents, 13 to 18 years old, with major depression were randomized to treatment with citalopram (n = 124) or placebo (n = 120). One third of the patients in both groups withdrew from the study. No significant differences in improvement of scores from baseline to week 12 between citalopram and placebo were found. The response rate was 59% to 61% in both groups according to the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for school-aged children-Present episode version (Kiddie-SADS-P) (depression and anhedonia scores < or =2) and Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) (> or =50% reduction). Remission (MADRS score < or =12) was achieved by 51% of patients with citalopram and 53% with placebo. A post hoc analysis revealed that more than two thirds of all patients received psychotherapy during this study. For those patients not receiving psychotherapy, there was a higher percentage of Kiddie-SADS-P responders with citalopram (41%) versus placebo (25%) and a significantly higher percentage of MADRS responders and remitters with citalopram (52% and 45%, respectively) versus placebo (22% and 19%, respectively). Mild to moderate treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 75% citalopram and 71% of placebo patients, most commonly headache, nausea, and insomnia. Serious adverse events occurred in 14% to 15% in both groups. Suicide attempts, including suicidal thoughts and tendencies, were reported by 5 patients in the placebo group and by 14 patients in the citalopram group (not significant) with no pattern with respect to duration of treatment, time of onset, or dosage. In contrast, the suicidal ideation (Kiddie-SADS-P) single item showed worsening more frequently in the placebo (18%) than in the citalopram group (8%).


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/therapeutic use , Citalopram/therapeutic use , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Adolescent , Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/administration & dosage , Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/adverse effects , Citalopram/administration & dosage , Citalopram/adverse effects , Depressive Disorder, Major/psychology , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales
6.
Neuropsychobiology ; 54(3): 152-9, 2006.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17230032

ABSTRACT

AIM: The primary aim was to investigate the long-term safety and tolerability of escitalopram (10 or 20 mg/day) treatment of elderly patients suffering from major depressive disorder. The secondary aim was to examine response to treatment, as measured by change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from study entry to each visit, using observed cases. METHOD: This extension trial included 225 patients who had completed an 8-week, double blind, placebo-controlled lead-in study, which was performed in outpatients in primary care and in specialist clinics. The intent-to-treat population comprised 223 patients. RESULTS: The overall withdrawal rate was 24%. The most common reason for withdrawal was adverse events (9%). The 5 most common adverse events were accidental injury, rhinitis, weight increase, arthralgia and coughing, with an incidence ranging from 8 to 13%. No new types of adverse events were reported in this extension study compared to the 8-week lead-in study. The mean weight increased from 69.7 kg at study entry to 70.3 kg at endpoint. The percentage of patients in remission (MADRS total score < or = 12) increased from 48% at study entry to 72% by week 52. CONCLUSION: Escitalopram demonstrated a favourable tolerability profile during 52 weeks of open-label treatment of elderly patients, with further improvement in depressive symptoms.


Subject(s)
Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/therapeutic use , Citalopram/therapeutic use , Depressive Disorder, Major/drug therapy , Accidental Falls , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Antidepressive Agents, Second-Generation/adverse effects , Citalopram/adverse effects , Depressive Disorder, Major/diagnosis , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Drug Administration Schedule , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Male , Psychiatric Status Rating Scales , Rhinitis/chemically induced , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors/adverse effects , Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Severity of Illness Index , Treatment Outcome , Weight Gain/drug effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...