How donanemab data address the coverage with evidence development questions.

The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) established a class-based National Coverage Determination (NCD) for monoclonal antibodies directed against amyloid for Alzheimer's disease (AD) with patient access through Coverage with Evidence Development (CED) based on three questions. This review, focused on donanemab, answers each of these CED questions with quality evidence. TRAILBLAZER-ALZ registration trials are presented with supporting literature and real-world data to answer CED questions for donanemab. TRAILBLAZER-ALZ registration trials demonstrated that donanemab significantly slowed cognitive and functional decline in amyloid-positive early symptomatic AD participants, and lowered their risk of disease progression while key safety risks occurred primarily within the first 6 months and then declined. Donanemab meaningfully improved health outcomes with a manageable safety profile in an early symptomatic AD population, representative of Medicare populations across diverse practice settings. The donanemab data provide the necessary level of evidence for CMS to open a reconsideration of their NCD. HIGHLIGHTS: Donanemab meaningfully improved outcomes in trial participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease. Comorbidities in trial participants were consistent with the Medicare population. Co-medications in trial participants were consistent with the Medicare population. Risks associated with treatment tended to occur in the first 6 months. Risks of amyloid-related imaging abnormalities were managed with careful observation and magnetic resonance imaging monitoring.

Donanemab in Early Symptomatic Alzheimer Disease: The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ 2 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: There are limited efficacious treatments for Alzheimer disease. Objective: To assess efficacy and adverse events of donanemab, an antibody designed to clear brain amyloid plaque. Design, Setting, and Participants: Multicenter (277 medical research centers/hospitals in 8 countries), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 18-month phase 3 trial that enrolled 1736 participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer disease (mild cognitive impairment/mild dementia) with amyloid and low/medium or high tau pathology based on positron emission tomography imaging from June 2020 to November 2021 (last patient visit for primary outcome in April 2023). Interventions: Participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive donanemab (n = 860) or placebo (n = 876) intravenously every 4 weeks for 72 weeks. Participants in the donanemab group were switched to receive placebo in a blinded manner if dose completion criteria were met. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was change in integrated Alzheimer Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) score from baseline to 76 weeks (range, 0-144; lower scores indicate greater impairment). There were 24 gated outcomes (primary, secondary, and exploratory), including the secondary outcome of change in the sum of boxes of the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale (CDR-SB) score (range, 0-18; higher scores indicate greater impairment). Statistical testing allocated α of .04 to testing low/medium tau population outcomes, with the remainder (.01) for combined population outcomes. Results: Among 1736 randomized participants (mean age, 73.0 years; 996 [57.4%] women; 1182 [68.1%] with low/medium tau pathology and 552 [31.8%] with high tau pathology), 1320 (76%) completed the trial. Of the 24 gated outcomes, 23 were statistically significant. The least-squares mean (LSM) change in iADRS score at 76 weeks was -6.02 (95% CI, -7.01 to -5.03) in the donanemab group and -9.27 (95% CI, -10.23 to -8.31) in the placebo group (difference, 3.25 [95% CI, 1.88-4.62]; P < .001) in the low/medium tau population and -10.2 (95% CI, -11.22 to -9.16) with donanemab and -13.1 (95% CI, -14.10 to -12.13) with placebo (difference, 2.92 [95% CI, 1.51-4.33]; P < .001) in the combined population. LSM change in CDR-SB score at 76 weeks was 1.20 (95% CI, 1.00-1.41) with donanemab and 1.88 (95% CI, 1.68-2.08) with placebo (difference, -0.67 [95% CI, -0.95 to -0.40]; P < .001) in the low/medium tau population and 1.72 (95% CI, 1.53-1.91) with donanemab and 2.42 (95% CI, 2.24-2.60) with placebo (difference, -0.7 [95% CI, -0.95 to -0.45]; P < .001) in the combined population. Amyloid-related imaging abnormalities of edema or effusion occurred in 205 participants (24.0%; 52 symptomatic) in the donanemab group and 18 (2.1%; 0 symptomatic during study) in the placebo group and infusion-related reactions occurred in 74 participants (8.7%) with donanemab and 4 (0.5%) with placebo. Three deaths in the donanemab group and 1 in the placebo group were considered treatment related. Conclusions and Relevance: Among participants with early symptomatic Alzheimer disease and amyloid and tau pathology, donanemab significantly slowed clinical progression at 76 weeks in those with low/medium tau and in the combined low/medium and high tau pathology population. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04437511.

Meaningful Clinical Changes in Alzheimer Disease Measured With the iADRS and Illustrated Using the Donanemab TRAILBLAZER-ALZ Study Findings.

Purpose of Review: To provide relevant background of the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS), with examples, to assist the reader with the interpretation of iADRS findings from the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study. Recent Findings: The iADRS is an integrated measure of global Alzheimer disease (AD) severity for use in the clinical trial environment. It provides a single score that captures commonalities across cognitive and functional ability domains, reflecting disease-related impairment, while minimizing noise not related to disease progression that may exist within each domain. In AD, disease-modifying therapies (DMTs) are expected to slow the rate of clinical decline, changing the trajectory of disease progression. The overall percent slowing of disease progression with treatment is a more informative outcome of effect than absolute point differences between treatment and placebo groups at any given time point because the latter is influenced by treatment period and disease severity. The TRAILBLAZER-ALZ trial was a phase 2 study designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of donanemab in participants with early symptomatic AD; the primary outcome measure was the change from baseline to 76 weeks on the iADRS. In the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ study, donanemab slowed disease progression by 32% at 18 months (p = 0.04 vs placebo), demonstrating clinical efficacy. At the patient level, one can assess whether the DMT effect is clinically meaningful by estimating the threshold of change consistent with clinically meaningful worsening; based on the TRAILBLAZER-ALZ findings, treatment with donanemab would delay reaching this threshold by approximately 6 months. Summary: The iADRS is capable of accurately describing clinical changes associated with disease progression and detecting treatment effects and is an effective assessment tool for use in clinical trials of individuals with early symptomatic AD.

Disease progression model using the integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale.

INTRODUCTION: An Alzheimer's disease (AD) dementia disease progression model was developed based on the integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS). METHODS: Data from 3483 placebo participants in six AD trials were used to develop the disease progression model with NONMEM (version 7.4.2) and examined for mild cognitive impairment, and mild and moderate dementia due to AD. RESULTS: Baseline iADRS score was significantly influenced by AD symptomatic medication use, EXPEDITION2 enrollment (included moderate AD participants), age, and baseline Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score. Rate of disease progression increased across disease stage and was significantly influenced by AD medication use, age, and baseline MMSE score. Apolipoprotein E ε4 carrier status did not influence baseline iADRS score or disease progression. DISCUSSION: These results demonstrate a disease progression model describing the time course of the iADRS across the AD severity spectrum. This model can assist future clinical trials in study design optimization and treatment effect interpretation. HIGHLIGHTS: A disease progression model described the integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) time course in mild cognitive impairment to moderate Alzheimer's disease. Using the linear regression model, iADRS scores can be calculated for Mini-Mental State Examination scores. Results can help optimize future clinical trial design and aid in understanding treatment effects.

Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale: Clinically meaningful change estimates.

Introduction: The Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) has been used to detect differences in disease progression in early Alzheimer's disease (AD). The objectives of this study were to enhance understanding of iADRS point changes within the context of clinical trials, and to establish a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) on the iADRS. Methods: Data from AMARANTH and EXPEDITION3 were analyzed using various approaches, including anchor-based, distribution-based, regression analyses, and cumulative distribution function (CDF) plots. Three potential anchors were examined, including the Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Functional Activities Questionnaire. Triangulation of all results was used to determine the MCID for participants with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to AD and AD with mild dementia. Results: All three anchors met criteria for "sufficiently associated" (|r| = 0.4-0.7). Cumulatively, results from anchor-based and distribution-based results converged to suggest an iADRS MCID of 5 points for MCI due to AD and 9 points for AD with mild dementia. Regression analyses and CDF plots supported these values. Discussion: These findings suggest the iADRS can be used in clinical trials to detect a clinically meaningful outcome of AD progression.

Demonstration of Clinical Meaningfulness of the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS): Association Between Change in iADRS Scores and Patient and Caregiver Health Outcomes.

BACKGROUND: The integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS) is a validated cognitive/functional composite that effectively captures cognitive and functional decline over a broad spectrum of disease. The clinical meaningfulness of change on iADRS can be supported by establishing an association with changes on important health outcome measures. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relationship between change on the iADRS and changes in health outcomes in individuals with mild cognitive impairment (MCI) due to Alzheimer's disease (AD), or mild or moderate AD dementia using placebo data from four AD clinical trials and data from one AD observational study. METHODS: Analysis of covariate (ANCOVA) models were used to estimate the relationship between 18-month change on the iADRS and changes on health outcome measures (related to cost, quality of life, and caregiver burden). The regression coefficients for the iADRS were used to compute impact of natural disease progression and disease-modifying treatment on health outcomes. Additional ANCOVAs were conducted to understand whether cognition and/or function was the underlying explanation of any association between iADRS and health outcome change. RESULTS: Across datasets and disease stages, a worsening on the iADRS was significantly associated with increased societal costs, caregiver burden (time and distress) and worsening in measures of patient quality of life. CONCLUSION: Decline on the iADRS was associated with worsening in health outcome measures. These findings suggest that the iADRS can be used in clinical trials as a proxy measure of clinically meaningful outcomes of AD progression.

Building clinically relevant outcomes across the Alzheimer's disease spectrum.

Demonstrating that treatments are clinically meaningful across the Alzheimer's disease (AD) continuum is critical for meeting our goals of accelerating a cure by 2025. While this topic has been a focus of several Alzheimer's Association Research Roundtable (AARR) meetings, there remains no consensus as to what constitutes a "clinically meaningful outcome" in the eyes of patients, clinicians, care partners, policymakers, payers, and regulatory bodies. Furthermore, the field has not come to agreement as to what constitutes a clinically meaningful treatment effect at each stage of disease severity. The AARR meeting on November 19-20, 2019, reviewed current approaches to defining clinical meaningfulness from various perspectives including those of patients and care partners, clinicians, regulators, health economists, and public policymakers. Participants discussed approaches that may confer clinical relevance at each stage of the disease continuum and fostered discussion about what should guide us in the future.

Donanemab in Early Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: A hallmark of Alzheimer's disease is the accumulation of amyloid-ß (Aß) peptide. Donanemab, an antibody that targets a modified form of deposited Aß, is being investigated for the treatment of early Alzheimer's disease. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2 trial of donanemab in patients with early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease who had tau and amyloid deposition on positron-emission tomography (PET). Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive donanemab (700 mg for the first three doses and 1400 mg thereafter) or placebo intravenously every 4 weeks for up to 72 weeks. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in the score on the Integrated Alzheimer's Disease Rating Scale (iADRS; range, 0 to 144, with lower scores indicating greater cognitive and functional impairment) at 76 weeks. Secondary outcomes included the change in scores on the Clinical Dementia Rating Scale-Sum of Boxes (CDR-SB), the 13-item cognitive subscale of the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale (ADAS-Cog13), the Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Inventory (ADCS-iADL), and the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), as well as the change in the amyloid and tau burden on PET. RESULTS: A total of 257 patients were enrolled; 131 were assigned to receive donanemab and 126 to receive placebo. The baseline iADRS score was 106 in both groups. The change from baseline in the iADRS score at 76 weeks was -6.86 with donanemab and -10.06 with placebo (difference, 3.20; 95% confidence interval, 0.12 to 6.27; P = 0.04). The results for most secondary outcomes showed no substantial difference. At 76 weeks, the reductions in the amyloid plaque level and the global tau load were 85.06 centiloids and 0.01 greater, respectively, with donanemab than with placebo. Amyloid-related cerebral edema or effusions (mostly asymptomatic) occurred with donanemab. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with early Alzheimer's disease, donanemab resulted in a better composite score for cognition and for the ability to perform activities of daily living than placebo at 76 weeks, although results for secondary outcomes were mixed. Longer and larger trials are necessary to study the efficacy and safety of donanemab in Alzheimer's disease. (Funded by Eli Lilly; TRAILBLAZER-ALZ ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03367403.).

Lanabecestat: Neuroimaging results in early symptomatic Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Lanabecestat, a beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1) inhibitor, was investigated as a potential Alzheimer's disease (AD)-modifying treatment. As previously reported, amyloid beta (Aß) neuritic plaque burden reduction did not result in clinical benefit. Lanabecestat's effects on neuroimaging biomarkers and correlations between neuroimaging biomarkers and efficacy measures are reported. METHODS: AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were 104- and 78-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of lanabecestat in early symptomatic AD (AMARANTH) and mild AD dementia (DAYBREAK-ALZ). Patients randomly (1:1:1) received placebo, lanabecestat 20 mg, or lanabecestat 50 mg daily (AMARANTH, n = 2218; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 1722). Florbetapir positron emission tomography (PET), fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) PET, flortaucipir PET, and volumetric magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) were used to measure Aß neuritic plaque burden, cerebral metabolism, aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangles, and brain volume, respectively. Additionally, florbetapir perfusion scans were performed in DAYBREAK-ALZ. Efficacy measures included 13-item Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive Subscale, Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating-Sum of Boxes, Functional Activities Questionnaire, and Mini-Mental State Examination. These studies stopped early due to futility. RESULTS: Despite previously observed annualized reduction in Aß neuritic plaque burden, there were no treatment differences in annualized change of aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden (AMARANTH, n = 284; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 70), cerebral metabolism (AMARANTH, n = 260; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 38) and perfusion (DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 213). Greater brain volume reduction (AMARANTH, n = 1697 [whole brain]; DAYBREAK-ALZ, n = 650 [whole brain]) occurred on lanabecestat compared to placebo. Higher baseline aggregated tau neurofibrillary tangle burden, lower cerebral metabolism, and lower brain volumes correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores and greater clinical worsening. Lower baseline cerebral perfusion correlated with poorer baseline efficacy scores. Reduction in cerebral metabolism or whole brain volume correlated with clinical worsening, regardless of treatment assignment. DISCUSSION: Tau pathology and cerebral metabolism assessments showed no evidence of lanabecestat slowing pathophysiologic progression of AD. Lanabecestat exposure was associated with brain volume reductions. Correlations between imaging measures and cognitive assessments may aid future study design.

Cognitive Go/No-Go decision-making criteria in Alzheimer's disease drug development.

Go/No-Go decision making in early phase clinical trials is challenging for drug developers working in Alzheimer's disease. Recent negative trial results have been attributed to a lack of efficacy and important safety concerns. Furthermore, demonstrated target engagement has rarely translated into demonstrable clinical efficacy. Cognitive data might provide valuable insights at various points during drug development, and a thoughtful and robust set of decision-making criteria, specified a priori, can and should be applied under many circumstances. This review provides insights into how to utilize cognitive data for Go/No-Go decisions, with an emphasis on how these cognitive criteria differ depending on the context (e.g., stage of development, mechanism of action and trial design).

Cognitive outcomes in trials of two BACE inhibitors in Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: The APECS and AMARANTH trials showed that beta-secretase (BACE) inhibitors verubecestat and lanabecestat failed to slow cognitive and functional decline in individuals with prodromal or early Alzheimer's disease. Here, the performance on secondary and exploratory cognitive measures in both studies is reported. METHODS: APECS (verubecestat) and AMARANTH (lanabecestat) were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 104-week clinical trials conducted by different sponsors. Measures included the 3-Domain Composite Cognition Score (CCS-3D), Repeatable Battery for the Assessment of Neuropsychological Status (RBANS), Letter/Category Fluency, and Digit Symbol Coding. RESULTS: Verubecestat showed worsening on the CCS-3D Total Score, Episodic Memory, and Attention/Processing Speed domains. Lanabecestat showed worsening on the RBANS Total Score, Immediate Memory, and Visuospatial/Constructional Indexes. Both BACE inhibitors showed worsening on Digit Symbol Coding and improvements on Letter/Category Fluency. DISCUSSION: In both studies, many measures showed treatment-associated cognitive worsening, whereas verbal fluency tasks showed improvement.

Efficacy and Safety of Lanabecestat for Treatment of Early and Mild Alzheimer Disease: The AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ Randomized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Alzheimer disease (AD) is a neurodegenerative disorder characterized by cognitive deterioration and impaired activities of daily living. Current treatments provide only minor symptomatic improvements with limited benefit duration. Lanabecestat, a brain-permeable inhibitor of human beta-site amyloid precursor protein-cleaving enzyme 1 (BACE1/ß-secretase), was developed to modify the clinical course of AD by slowing disease progression. Objective: To assess whether lanabecestat slows the progression of AD compared with placebo in patients with early AD (mild cognitive impairment) and mild AD dementia. Design, Setting, and Participants: AMARANTH (first patient visit on September 30, 2014; last patient visit on October 4, 2018) and DAYBREAK-ALZ (first patient visit on July 1, 2016; last patient visit on September 28, 2018) were randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 2/3 and phase 3 clinical trials lasting 104 weeks and 78 weeks, respectively. AMARANTH and DAYBREAK-ALZ were multicenter, global, double-blind studies conducted at 257 and 251 centers, respectively, located in 15 and 18 countries or territories, respectively. A population-based sample of men and women aged 55 to 85 years who met National Institute on Aging-Alzheimer's Association criteria for early AD or mild AD dementia was screened using cognitive assessments, and the presence of amyloid was confirmed. Patients were excluded for unstable medical conditions or medication use, significant cerebrovascular pathologic findings, or a history of vitiligo and/or current evidence of postinflammatory hypopigmentation. AMARANTH screened 6871 patients; 2218 (32.3%) were randomized, and 539 patients completed the study. DAYBREAK-ALZ screened 5706 patients; 1722 (30.2%) were randomized, and 76 patients completed the study. Interventions: Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to once-daily oral doses of lanabecestat (20 mg), lanabecestat (50 mg), or placebo. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome measure was change from baseline on the 13-item Alzheimer Disease Assessment Scale-cognitive subscale. Secondary outcomes included Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Instrumental Activities of Daily Living Inventory, Clinical Dementia Rating, Functional Activities Questionnaire, Mini-Mental State Examination, and Neuropsychiatric Inventory. Efficacy analyses were conducted on the intent-to-treat population. Results: Among 2218 AMARANTH patients, the mean (SD) age was 71.3 (7.1) years, and 1177 of 2218 (53.1%) were women. Among 1722 DAYBREAK-ALZ patients, the mean (SD) age was 72.3 (7.0) years, and 1023 of 1722 (59.4%) were women. Both studies were terminated early after futility analysis. There were no consistent, reproducible dose-related findings on primary or secondary efficacy measures. Psychiatric adverse events, weight loss, and hair color changes were reported in a higher percentage of patients receiving lanabecestat than placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Treatment with lanabecestat was well tolerated and did not slow cognitive or functional decline. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02245737 and NCT02783573.

Statistical properties of continuous composite scales and implications for drug development.

Little research has been conducted on the statistical properties of composite measures comprising linear combinations of continuous component scales. We assessed the quantitative relationship between the composites and their individual components regarding their abilities to detect treatment effects. In particular, we developed the mathematical derivation of the treatment effect size of a continuous composite in relation to the treatment effect sizes of its components and proved multiple properties of the composite. We demonstrated that the treatment effect size of a composite is greater than the minimum treatment effect size of its components and that above certain thresholds of correlations of components and ratios of component effect sizes, the composite may outperform its components. Examples from Alzheimer's disease (AD) clinical studies of solanezumab and donepezil using the composite Integrated AD Rating Scale (iADRS) and its components, the AD Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog) and AD Cooperative Study-Activities of Daily Living inventory, instrumental items (ADCS-iADL) were consistent with the theoretical statistical properties. The understanding of the quantitative relationships between continuous composites and their components will be useful in clinical trial design and the development of new scales and composites across therapeutic areas.

Differential impact of subclinical carotid artery disease on cerebral structure and functioning in type 1 diabetes patients with versus those without proliferative retinopathy.

BACKGROUND: Type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is associated with cerebral compromise, typically found in patients with microangiopathy. Associations between subclinical macroangiopathy and the brain, whether or not in the presence of microangiopathy, have not been fully explored in T1DM. We hypothesized that subclinical macroangiopathy in adult T1DM may affect the brain and interacts with microangiopathy. METHODS: In 51 asymptomatic T1DM patients with, 53 without proliferative retinopathy and 51 controls, right common carotid artery ultrasound was used to assess intima media thickness (cIMT) and distensibility (cD). Neuropsychological tests for cognitive functions, and magnetic resonance imagining for white matter integrity and functional connectivity, i.e. neuronal communication, were used. RESULTS: After correction for confounders, cIMT was borderline significantly increased in all T1DM patients (P = 0.071), whereas cD was not statistically significantly altered (P = 0.45). Patients with proliferative retinopathy showed the largest increase in cIMT and decrease in cD. In all participants, after adjustment for confounders, increased cIMT was related to decreased white matter integrity (ß = -0.198 P = 0.041) and decreased functional connectivity in visual areas (ß = -0.195 P = 0.046). For cognition, there was a significant interaction between cIMT and the presence of proliferative retinopathy after adjustment for confounding factors (all P < 0.05). Increased cIMT was associated with lower general cognitive ability (ß = -0.334; P = 0.018), information processing speed (ß = -0.361; P = 0.010) and attention (ß = -0.394; P = 0.005) scores in patients without, but not in patients with proliferative retinopathy. CONCLUSIONS: These findings suggest that subclinical macroangiopathy may be a factor in the development of diabetes-related cognitive changes in uncomplicated T1DM, whereas in patients with advanced T1DM, proliferative retinopathy may rather be the driving force of cerebral compromise.

Adherence to escitalopram treatment in depression: a study of electronically compiled dosing histories in the 'Depression: the search for phenotypes' study.

Poor adherence to depression treatment is common. Understanding determinants of poor adherence to therapy is crucial to ensure optimal clinical outcomes. The aim of this study was to describe characteristics of dosing history in participants with depression receiving once daily escitalopram. Participants were randomly assigned to interpersonal psychotherapy (IPT) or pharmacotherapy. Participants assigned to IPT who did not evidence a response or remission had escitalopram added to their treatment. Adherence to pharmacotherapy was assessed using an electronically monitored pill cap (MEMS). Fifty-four participants on escitalopram alone and 32 on escitalopram+IPT were monitored. After 200 days, 71.7% of the participants in the escitalopram group and 54.8% of those in the escitalopram+IPT group were still engaged with the dosing regimen. Of those engaged in the dosing regimen, 17.9% (average over 210 days) of the participants did not take their medication (nonexecution). In 69% of the days participants took the correct dosage required. On average, participants had three drug holidays and the mean length of a holiday was 7 days per patient. No difference in adherence patterns was observed between patients receiving escitalopram alone vs. IPT+escitalopram. Early discontinuation of treatment and suboptimal daily execution of the prescribed regimen are the most common facets of poor adherence in this study population.

Age and sex impact clozapine plasma concentrations in inpatients and outpatients with schizophrenia.

BACKGROUND: Although clozapine is primarily used in a younger to mid-life population of patients with psychosis, there are limited data on the clinical pharmacology of clozapine later in life. The objective of this study was to assess the magnitude and variability of plasma concentrations of clozapine and norclozapine across the lifespan in a real-world clinical setting. DESIGN: A population pharmacokinetic study using nonlinear mixed effect modeling (NONMEM). Age, sex, height, weight, and dosage formulation were covariates. SETTING: Inpatients and outpatients at the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, from 2001 to 2007. PARTICIPANTS: Patients ranging in ages from 11 to 79 with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and prescribed clozapine (Clozaril). MEASUREMENTS: A total of 1142 plasma clozapine and norclozapine concentrations (2,284 concentration measurements) from 391 patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder. RESULTS: A one-compartment model with first-order absorption and elimination best described the data. The population predicted clearance of clozapine for females was 27.1 L/h (SE 11.1%) and 36.7 L/h (SE 9.7%) for males. For norclozapine, clearance in females was 48.6 L/h (SE 10.8%) and 63.1 L/h (SE 9.3%) in males. The only covariates with a significant effect on clearance were age and sex: clearance for both parent and metabolite decreased exponentially with age at least 39 years. CONCLUSIONS: Decreased clearance of clozapine and norclozapine with age results in increased blood concentrations and, hence, the potential for adverse drug reactions. These findings have particular clinical relevance for the dosing and safety monitoring of clozapine in older adults, highlighting a need for increased vigilance.

Diabetes and cognitive decline in elderly African Americans: a 15-year follow-up study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes mellitus is associated with an increased risk for cognitive impairment and vascular factors seem to play a role in this relationship. In a sample involving elderly African Americans, we tested the hypothesis that diabetes accelerates cognitive decline and explored possible mediating mechanisms within a follow-up period of 15 years. METHODS: A total of 1,702 subjects, of whom 441 had diabetes, were given the community screening interview for dementia to measure cognitive functioning at six different time points spread over a 15-year follow-up period. Mixed effects models with repeated measures were used to examine the association of diabetes and vascular risk factors with cognitive scores over time. RESULTS: African American subjects with diabetes reported having a significant accelerated cognitive decline as compared with those without diabetes (P = .046), when controlling for basic demographics and baseline comorbid conditions (heart disease, hypertension, stroke, and depression). Adjusting for incident heart disease, and especially stroke, weakened this association (P = .098), thereby indicating a mediating effect of stroke on the association between diabetes and cognitive decline. However, when incident stroke was incorporated into the model, the effect for participants with diabetes increased greatly (P = .007). CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes, mediated by cerebrovascular pathology, accelerates cognitive decline within a follow-up period of 15 years in a sample comprising African Americans.