Bumetanide oral solution for the treatment of children and adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: Results from two randomized phase III studies.

The efficacy and safety of bumetanide oral solution for the treatment of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) in children and adolescents was evaluated in two international, multi-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trials; one enrolled patients aged 7-17 years (SIGN 1 trial) and the other enrolled younger patients aged 2-6 years (SIGN 2). In both studies, patients were randomized to receive bumetanide oral solution twice daily (BID) or placebo BID during a 6-month double-blind treatment period. The primary endpoint was change in Childhood Autism Rating Scale 2 (CARS2) total raw score from baseline to Week 26. Key secondary endpoints included changes in Social Responsiveness Scale-2, Clinical Global Impression Scale, and Vineland Adaptive Behavior Scale. Each study enrolled 211 patients (bumetanide, n = 107; placebo, n = 104). Both studies were terminated early due to absence of any significant difference between bumetanide and placebo in the overall studied populations. In both studies, CARS2 total raw score decreased from baseline to Week 26 in the bumetanide and placebo groups, with no statistically significant difference between groups. No differences were observed between treatment groups for any of the secondary efficacy endpoints in either study. In both studies, treatment-emergent adverse events that occurred more frequently with bumetanide than placebo included thirst, polyuria, hypokalemia, and dry mouth. These large phase III trials failed to demonstrate a benefit of bumetanide for the treatment of pediatric ASD compared with placebo. Consequently, the sponsor has discontinued the development of bumetanide for the treatment of this condition. Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov: SIGN 1: NCT03715166; SIGN 2: NCT03715153.

Safety and efficacy of agomelatine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder receiving psychosocial counselling: a double-blind, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in nine countries.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder is a severe illness that frequently manifests before the age of 18 years, often recurring later in life. Paediatric medical treatment options are scarce. The melatonin receptor agonist and 5-hydroxytryptamine2C receptor antagonist agomelatine is used to treat adults, and could offer a new therapeutic option for paediatric patients. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the short-term antidepressant efficacy and safety of agomelatine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder. METHODS: We performed a 12 week, randomised, double-blind, parallel-group, multicentre, phase 3 trial in 46 specialist psychiatric units or centres in Bulgaria, Finland, Hungary, Poland, Romania, Russia, Serbia, South Africa, and Ukraine. Participants (aged 7-17 years) were eligible if they were unresponsive to psychosocial therapy during the 3-week run-in period (Children's Depression Rating Scale-revised [CDRS-R] score of ≥45). Ethnicity was not recorded. We investigated short-term antidepressant efficacy of agomelatine (10 mg or 25 mg per day) versus placebo with an active control (fluoxetine 10-20 mg depending on symptom severity) after 12 weeks of treatment in children (aged 7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to agomelatine 10 mg, agomelatine 25 mg, placebo, or fluoxetine via an interactive response system with permuted-block randomisation. Standardised manualised psychosocial counselling, developed for this trial, was initiated from selection and continued throughout the study, including the open-label extension. All people involved in the conduct of the clinical trial and patients were masked to treatment allocation. Study outcomes were measured using standardised interviews at each study visit. The primary endpoint was change in CDRS-R raw score from baseline to week 12. This study is registered with EudraCT, 2015-002181-23. FINDINGS: Between Feb 23, 2016, and Jan 14, 2020, 466 individuals were assessed for eligibility and of 400 included patients, 396 (247 [62%] girls, 149 [38%] boys; mean age 13·7 years [SD 2·7]) were analysed (full analysis set). The primary objective was met; 25 mg/day agomelatine (n=94, with n=102 receiving 10 mg/day) resulted in an improvement versus placebo (n=101) in CDRS-R raw score of 4·22 (95% CI 0·63-7·82; p=0·040) at 12 weeks, with a similar effect for fluoxetine (n=99), establishing assay sensitivity. The overall effect was confirmed in adolescents (n=317), but not in children (n=79). No unexpected safety signals were observed with agomelatine, with no significant weight gain or effect on suicidal behaviours. INTERPRETATION: This first study in a paediatric population supports the efficacy of 25 mg/day agomelatine, in addition to psychosocial counselling, in treating adolescent patients with major depressive disorder, with no unexpected safety signals. This medication could provide another option in the limited psychopharmaceutical repertoire for management of major depressive disorder. FUNDING: Servier. VIDEO ABSTRACT.

Bumetanide Oral Liquid Formulation for the Treatment of Children and Adolescents with Autism Spectrum Disorder: Design of Two Phase III Studies (SIGN Trials).

There are currently no approved pharmacological treatments to improve social reciprocity and limit repetitive and rigid behaviors in autism spectrum disorder (ASD). We describe the design of two Phase III studies evaluating the efficacy/safety of bumetanide oral liquid formulation in ASD. These are international, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in children and adolescents with ASD aged 7 to 17 years (n = 200; study 1), or younger children with ASD aged 2 to 6 years (n = 200; study 2). The primary endpoint of each is change in Childhood Autism Rating Scale 2 total raw score after 6 months. These studies could contribute to the first pharmacological treatment to improve social reciprocity and limit repetitive and rigid behaviors in children and adolescents with ASD.

Efficacy of Tianeptine 25-50 mg in Elderly Patients With Recurrent Major Depressive Disorder: An 8-Week Placebo- and Escitalopram-Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: The present placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 8 weeks of treatment with tianeptine 25-50 mg/d in elderly patients suffering from major depressive disorder (MDD) according to DSM-IV-TR. Escitalopram 5-10 mg/d was used as an active comparator. METHODS: Elderly outpatients aged at least 65 years with a primary diagnosis of moderate to severe episode of recurrent MDD were recruited by psychiatrists in 44 clinical centers in 10 countries from October 2013 to January 2016. Patients were randomly assigned to receive tianeptine (n = 105), placebo (n = 107), or escitalopram (n = 99) for 8 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS17) total score. RESULTS: Tianeptine improved depressive symptoms, as evaluated by the HDRS17 total score in terms of absolute change from baseline (week 0) to week 8 (placebo-tianeptine difference [SE] of 3.84 [0.85] points, P < .001, using a last-observation-carried-forward approach) and response to treatment (tianeptine: 46.7%; placebo: 34.0%, estimate [SE] = 12.70% [6.70], P = .06). A sensitivity analysis using a mixed model for repeated measures confirmed the main results on HDRS total s​core. The placebo-tianeptine difference (SE) was 0.66 (0.15) for Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; P < .001) and 0.57 (0.14) for Clinical Global Impressions- Improvement (95% CI, 0.30 to 0.83; P < .001). Positive results were also obtained with the active control escitalopram (HDRS17 total score placebo-escitalopram difference of 4.09 ± 0.86 points, P < .001), therefore validating the sensitivity of the studied population. Tianeptine was well tolerated, with only minimal differences in tolerability from placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The present study provides robust evidence that an 8-week treatment period with tianeptine 25-50 mg is efficacious and well tolerated in depressed patients aged 65 years or older. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT identifier: 2012-005612-26​.

Absence of psychostimulant effects of a supratherapeutic dose of tianeptine: a placebo-controlled study versus methylphenidate in young healthy volunteers.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of the present study was to assess the potential psychostimulant effect of a single oral supratherapeutic dose of tianeptine (75 mg in 1 shot) in young healthy volunteers compared with methylphenidate (40 mg) and placebo. METHOD: Eighteen healthy young male and female volunteers with no history of psychostimulant abuse completed this balanced, crossover, placebo-controlled study. Subjective and behavioral effects were assessed before treatment and 1, 2, 3, 4, and 8 hours after drug intake. Subjective effects of the drugs were recorded using self-questionnaire Addiction Research Center Inventory (ARCI 49). In addition, the Profile of Mood Scale, Visual Analog Scale, and attention/vigilance tests (choice reaction time and critical flicker fusion test) were used to evaluate mood state, subjective feeling, and sustained attention, respectively. RESULTS: Analysis on changes from baseline, from 1 to 8 hours, showed statistically significant differences between treatment groups for 2 of the 5 ARCI subscales: amphetamine and morphine benzedrine scales. A trend to significance was observed for Lysergic Acid Diethylamide scale. Indeed, although tianeptine did not significantly change any ARCI scores, methylphenidate significantly increased amphetamine and morphine benzedrine scores of the ARCI compared with placebo. No significant treatment effect was observed on the Profile of Mood Scale and the visual analog scale. Analyses of attention and vigilance tests showed a psychostimulant effect for methylphenidate on choice reaction time (decrease of recognition time) and critical flicker fusion test (higher frequency). CONCLUSIONS: A single administration of a supratherapeutic dose of tianeptine does not induce psychostimulant effect in young healthy volunteers in contrast to methylphenidate at a therapeutic dose. These findings suggest an absence of psychostimulant liability of tianeptine in a therapeutic situation.

Markers of D(2) and D(3) receptor activity in vivo: PET scan and prolactin.

Positrons Emission Tomography (PET) allows to evaluate the dopaminergic activity of antipsychotic, by measuring post synaptic D(2) dopaminergic receptors occupancy. A good correlation was brought forward between a rate of occupancy of 80% of striatal D(2) receptors and the occurrence of extrapyramidal effects. These PET studies have also established that at least 60% D(2) receptors occupancy was predictive of clinical antipsychotic response. The PET studies in healthy volunteers can then be used to help choose doses to be tested during the clinical trials of new antipsychotic drugs. The increase in prolactin level is one other of the markers of the antagonist dopaminergic activity which concerns D(2) receptors of the pituitary gland. The example of S 33138, a potential antipsychotic, preferential D(3) versus D(2) receptor antagonist will be given to illustrate these data. The results of two PET studies as well as the effects on prolactin and extrapyramidal signs will be presented.