Long-term open-label safety study of galcanezumab in patients with episodic or chronic cluster headache.

BACKGROUND: CGAR, a Phase 3b open-label study, evaluated the long-term safety of galcanezumab in patients with cluster headache who completed one of two Phase 3 double-blind studies in chronic or episodic cluster headache. METHODS: Patients (N = 164) received galcanezumab 300 mg subcutaneously up to once a month. Primary endpoint was safety, as assessed by treatment-emergent adverse events, serious adverse events, and suicidality. Other endpoints included discontinuation rates, immunogenicity, efficacy as assessed by the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, and health values. RESULTS: At baseline, mean (standard deviation) age was 48.3 (9.8) years, 75.0% were men, and 85.4% were white. Treatment-emergent adverse events (n = 119 [72.6%]) were mostly mild-to-moderate, with nasopharyngitis the most commonly reported (22.0%). One of 18 serious adverse events was judged as treatment related (constipation). Two patients (1.2%) reported suicidal ideation. Five patients (3.1%) discontinued due to an adverse event. Eight patients were treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody positive, two of whom were not treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody positive in the parent studies. On the Patient Global Impression of Improvement, ≥81% reported their cluster headache status as very much, much, or a little better at Months 1, 6, and 12. Health value scores generally improved from baseline. CONCLUSIONS: In this open-label study, galcanezumab was generally well tolerated and improved patient-reported cluster headache status.Trial registration number: NCT02797951; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02797951.

Correction to: Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors noticed an error in the values for 'Hypersensitivity SMQ' and 'Rash' in Table 7.

Safety and tolerability of monthly galcanezumab injections in patients with migraine: integrated results from migraine clinical studies.

BACKGROUND: Galcanezumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that selectively binds to calcitonin gene-related peptide, has demonstrated a significant reduction in monthly migraine headache days in phase 2 and 3 trials. In these analyses, we aimed to evaluate the safety and tolerability of galcanezumab compared with placebo for prevention of episodic or chronic migraine. METHODS: Data were integrated from three double-blind clinical studies for the up to 6-month galcanezumab exposure group (N = 1435), and from five clinical studies for the up to 1-year all-galcanezumab exposure group (N = 2276). Patients received a monthly 120 mg subcutaneous injection of galcanezumab (with a 240 mg loading dose in month 1), 240 mg galcanezumab, or placebo. Outcomes measured were treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious AEs (SAEs), and discontinuation due to AEs (DCAEs). Laboratory results, vital signs, electrocardiogram (ECG), suicidal ideation and behavior results were evaluated. RESULTS: TEAEs that occurred more frequently in galcanezumab-treated patients included injection site pain, injection site reactions excluding pain, constipation, vertigo, and pruritus. The proportion of DCAEs among galcanezumab-treated patients ranged between 1.8 and 3.0%, and differed from placebo group for galcanezumab 240 mg (P < 0.05). Fewer than 2.0% of patients in either galcanezumab dose-group compared with 1.0% of placebo-treated patients reported a SAE. There were no clinically meaningful differences between galcanezumab and placebo in laboratory measures, vital signs including blood pressure, ECGs, cardiovascular-related AEs, or suicidal ideation and behavior. CONCLUSIONS: Galcanezumab demonstrated a favorable safety and tolerability profile for up to 1 year of treatment for the prevention of migraine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials CGAB = NCT02163993, EVOLVE-1 = NCT02614183, EVOLVE-2 = NCT02614196, REGAIN = NCT02614261, and CGAJ = NCT02614287. All were first posted on 25 November 2015, except CGAB posted on 16 June 2014, and before enrolling the first patient.

Acute and longer-term safety results from a pooled analysis of duloxetine studies for the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To assess acute and longer-term safety of duloxetine in the treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD), a pooled analysis of data from two completed randomized, double-blind, multicenter, phase 3, placebo- and active-controlled trials was undertaken. In these studies, neither duloxetine (investigational drug) nor fluoxetine (active control) demonstrated a statistically significant improvement compared with placebo on the primary efficacy measure. METHODS: Patients ages 7-17 years with MDD as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) received duloxetine (n=341), fluoxetine (n=234), or placebo (n=225) for 10 week acute and 26 week extended (duloxetine or fluoxetine only) treatments. Safety measures included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, vital signs, electrocardiograms, laboratory samples, and growth (height and weight) assessments. RESULTS: Significantly more patients discontinued because of adverse events during duloxetine (8.2%) treatment than during placebo (3.1%) treatment (p≤0.05). TEAEs in >10% of duloxetine-treated patients were headache and nausea. No completed suicides or deaths occurred. During acute treatment, 6.6% of duloxetine-, 8.0% of fluoxetine-, and 8.2% of placebo-treated patients had worsening suicidal ideation from baseline. Among patients initially randomized to duloxetine or fluoxetine who had suicidal ideation at study baseline, 81% of duloxetine- and 77% of fluoxetine-treated patients had improvements in suicidal ideation at end-point in the 36-week studies. Suicidal behavior occurred in two fluoxetine-treated patients and one placebo-treated patient during acute treatment, and in seven duloxetine-treated patients and one fluoxetine-treated patient during extended treatment. Duloxetine-treated patients had a mean pulse increase of ∼3 beats per minute, and mean blood pressure (both systolic and diastolic) increases of <2.0 mm Hg at week 36. Weight decrease (≥3.5%) during acute treatment occurred with statistically (p≤0.05) greater frequency for both the duloxetine (11.4%) and fluoxetine (11.5%) groups versus the placebo (5.5%) group; however, mean weight increase occurred for both duloxetine and fluoxetine groups during extended treatment. CONCLUSION: Results from this pooled analysis of two studies were consistent with the known safety and tolerability profile of duloxetine. Clinical Trial Registry Numbers: NCT00849901 and NCT00849693.

Prospective assessment of suicidal ideation and behavior: an internet survey of pharmaceutical sponsor practices.

OBJECTIVE: To survey the current approaches of clinical trial sponsors in prospective suicidal ideation and behavior assessments and challenges encountered. DESIGN: An internet-based survey. SETTING: Inclusion of prospective assessments of suicidal ideation and behavior in industry-sponsored clinical studies were required following the release of the September 2010 United States Federal Drug Administration draft guidance. The International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology Suicidal Ideation and Behavior Assessment Workgroup conducted an online survey to understand industry practices and experiences in implementing suicidal ideation and behavior assessments in clinical trials. PARTICIPANTS: The survey was sent to 1,447 industry employees at 178 pharmaceutical companies. A total of 89 evaluable responses, representing 39 companies, were obtained. MEASUREMENTS: A 30-item internet survey was developed asking about potential challenges and issues in implementing prospective suicidal ideation and behavior assessments. RESULTS: Common factors in deciding whether to include suicidal ideation and behavior assessments in a clinical trial were psychiatric or neurologic drug product (95%); central nervous system activity (78%); disease (74%) and patient population (71%); and regulatory announcements and policies (74%). The most common challenges in implementing suicidal ideation and behavior assessments included cross-cultural differences in acceptance of SIB assessments (40%); obtaining adequate baseline history (36.8%); obtaining translations (35%); investigator/rater discomfort with asking about suicidal ideation and behavior (32%); and inadequate training of raters to administer suicidal ideation and behavior ratings (30%). CONCLUSION: Among sponsors surveyed, the implementation rate of suicidal ideation and behavior assessment in central nervous systems studies is very high. Most have used the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. Challenges regarding standardization of retrospective assessment timeframes and differing approaches to summarizing and analyzing suicidal ideation and behavior-related study data were frequently reported. These results suggest that inconsistent reports of suicidal ideation and behavior within study datasets may occur and that integration of data across studies remains a concern.

Meta-analysis of suicide-related behavior or ideation in child, adolescent, and adult patients treated with atomoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: This meta-analysis examined suicide-related events in the acute phases of double-blind, placebo-controlled atomoxetine trials in pediatric and adult patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: A total of 3883 pediatric and 3365 adult patients were included. Potential events were identified from the adverse events database using a text-string search. Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (MHRR) were calculated for potential suicide-related events categorized according to United States Food and Drug Administration defined codes. RESULTS: In this data set, no completed suicides were reported in the pediatric or adult populations. One pediatric (attempted suicide) (and no adult patient events) was categorized as suicidal behavior in the atomoxetine group. The frequency of combined suicidal behavior or ideation with atomoxetine treatment was 0.37% in pediatric patients (vs. 0.07% with placebo) and 0.11% in adults (vs. 0.12% with placebo) and the risk compared with placebo was not statistically significant (MHRR=1.57; p=0.42 and MHRR=0.96; p=0.96, respectively). In pediatric patients, suicidal ideation only was reported more frequently compared with placebo (MHRR=1.63; p=0.41). CONCLUSIONS: Overall in this data set, no completed suicides and 1 pediatric patient suicidal behavior event were reported in atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients. Suicidal ideation was uncommon among atomoxetine-treated pediatric and adult patients, although it was reported more frequently in atomoxetine-treated pediatric patients compared with placebo; the reporting rate difference was not statistically significant. The MHRR of suicidal ideation was consistent with a previous meta-analysis of similar design. There was no evidence of increased risk for suicidal behavior in atomoxetine-treated pediatric or adult patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . The data reported are from an analysis of 23 pediatric and 9 adult clinical trials completed between 1998 and 2011. Ten pediatric (Studies HFBD, HFBK, LYAC, LYAS, LYAT, LYAW, LYAX, LYBG, LYBI, and LYBP) and two adult trials (Studies LYAA and LYAO) were conducted before the requirement to post trials at initiation (ongoing as of July 1, 2005) and, therefore, do not have a registration number. The registration numbers for the 13 pediatric trials meeting this requirement are: NCT00191698 (LYBX), NCT00486122 (LYCC), NCT00386581 (LYCZ), NCT00485459 (S010), NCT00191542 (LY15), NCT00191295 (LYBC), NCT00191906 (LYCK), NCT00192023 (LYCY), NCT00191945 (LYDM), NCT00546910 (LYDV), NCT00406354 (LYDW), NCT00380692 (S017), and NCT00607919 (LYEB). For the seven adult trials, the registration numbers are: NCT00190931 (LYBV), NCT00190957 (LYBY), NCT00190736 (LYCU), NCT00190775 (LYCW), NCT00190879 (LYDQ), NCT00510276 (LYDZ), and NCT00962104 (LYEE).

A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine fixed doses in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine fixed dose in the treatment of children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Patients (n=463) in this 36 week study (10 week acute and 26 week extension treatment) received duloxetine 60 mg QD (n=108), duloxetine 30 mg QD (n=116), fluoxetine 20 mg QD (n=117, active control), or placebo (n=122). Measures included: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: Neither active drug (duloxetine or fluoxetine) separated significantly (p<0.05) from placebo on mean change from baseline to end-point (10 weeks) on the CDRS-R total score. Total TEAEs and discontinuation for AEs were significantly (p<0.05) higher only for the duloxetine 60 mg group versus the placebo group during acute treatment. No clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) or laboratory abnormalities were observed, and no completed suicides or deaths occurred during the study. A total of 7 (6.7%) duloxetine 60 mg, 6 (5.2%) duloxetine 30 mg, 9 (8.0%) fluoxetine, and 11 (9.4%) placebo patients had worsening of suicidal ideation from baseline during acute treatment. Of the patients with suicidal ideation at baseline, 13/16 (81%) duloxetine 60 mg, 16/17 (94%) duloxetine 30 mg, 11/16 (69%) fluoxetine, and 13/15 (87%) placebo had improvement in suicidal ideation at end-point during acute treatment. One fluoxetine, one placebo, and six duloxetine patients had treatment-emergent suicidal behavior during the 36 week study. CONCLUSIONS: Trial results were inconclusive, as neither the investigational drug (duloxetine) nor the active control (fluoxetine) separated from placebo on the CDRS-R at 10 weeks. No new duloxetine safety signals were identified relative to those seen in adults. Clinical Trial Registry Number ( www.ClinicalTrials.gov ): NCT00849693.

A double-blind efficacy and safety study of duloxetine flexible dosing in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of duloxetine flexible dose in children (7-11 years) and adolescents (12-17 years) with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Patients (n=337) in this 36 week study (10 week acute and 26 week extension treatment) received duloxetine (60-120 mg once daily [QD], n=117), fluoxetine (20-40 mg QD, n=117), or placebo (n=103). Measures included: Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R), treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). RESULTS: Neither active drug (duloxetine or fluoxetine) separated significantly (p<0.05) from placebo on mean change from baseline to end-point (10 weeks) on the CDRS-R total score. There were no significant differences between the duloxetine or fluoxetine groups compared with placebo on serious AEs (SAEs), total TEAEs, or discontinuation for AE during acute treatment. There were no completed suicides or deaths, and no clinically significant electrocardiogram (ECG) abnormalities observed during the study. One fluoxetine and one duloxetine patient experienced alanine aminotransferase (ALT) three or more times the upper limit of normal, which resolved during the study. A total of 8 (7.1%) duloxetine patients, 7 (6.8%) placebo patients, and 9 (8.0%) fluoxetine patients had worsening of suicidal ideation from baseline during acute treatment. Of the patients with suicidal ideation at baseline, 15/19 (79%) duloxetine, 19/19 (100%) placebo, and 16/19 (84%) fluoxetine had improvement in suicidal ideation at end-point during acute treatment. One duloxetine and two fluoxetine patients had treatment-emergent suicidal behavior during the 36 week study. CONCLUSION: Trial results were inconclusive, as neither the investigational drug (duloxetine) nor the active control (fluoxetine) separated from placebo on the CDRS-R at 10 weeks. No new duloxetine safety signals were identified relative to those seen in adults. Clinical Trial Registry Number: NCT00849901.

The risk of bleeding with duloxetine treatment in patients who use nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs): analysis of placebo-controlled trials and post-marketing adverse event reports.

PURPOSE: To assess the safety of duloxetine with regards to bleeding-related events in patients who concomitantly did, versus did not, use nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), including aspirin. METHODS: Safety data from all placebo-controlled trials of duloxetine conducted between December 1993 and December 2010, and post-marketing reports from duloxetine-treated patients in the US Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), were searched for bleeding-related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The percentage of patients with bleeding-related TEAEs was summarized and compared between treatment groups in all the placebo-controlled studies. Differences between NSAID user and non-user subgroups from clinical trial data were analyzed by a logistic regression model that included therapy, NSAID use, and therapy-by-NSAID subgroup interaction. In addition, to determine if higher duloxetine doses are associated with an increased incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs, and whether the use of concomitant NSAIDs might influence the dose effect if one exists, placebo-controlled clinical trials with duloxetine fixed doses of 60 mg, 120 mg, and placebo were analyzed. Also, the incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs reported for duloxetine alone was compared with the incidence in patients treated with duloxetine and concomitant NSAIDs. Finally, the number of bleeding-related cases reported for duloxetine in the FAERS database was compared with the numbers reported for all other drugs. RESULTS: Across duloxetine clinical trials, there was a significantly greater incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs in duloxetine- versus placebo-treated patients overall and also in those patients who did not take concomitant NSAIDS, but no significant difference was seen among those patients who did take concomitant NSAIDS. There was no significant difference in the incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs in the subset of patients treated with duloxetine 120 mg once daily versus those treated with 60 mg once daily regardless of concomitant NSAID use. The combination of duloxetine and NSAIDs was associated with a statistically significantly higher incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs compared with duloxetine alone. A similarly higher incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs was seen in patients treated with placebo and concomitant NSAIDs compared with placebo alone. Bleeding-related TEAEs reported in the FAERS database were disproportionally more frequent for duloxetine taken with NSAIDs compared with the full FAERS background, but there was no difference in the reporting of bleeding-related TEAEs when the cases reported for duloxetine taken with NSAIDs were compared against the cases reported for NSAIDs alone. CONCLUSION: Concomitant use of NSAIDs was associated with a higher incidence of bleeding-related TEAEs in clinical trials regardless of whether patients were taking duloxetine or placebo; bleeding-related TEAEs did not appear to increase along with duloxetine dose regardless of NSAID use. In spontaneously reported post-marketing data, the combination of duloxetine and NSAID use was not associated with an increased reporting of bleeding-related events when compared to NSAID use alone.

Assessment of falls in older patients treated with duloxetine: a secondary analysis of a 24-week randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess fall events in older depressed patients during treatment with duloxetine. METHOD: Post hoc analysis of solicited fall events collected at each study visit using a questionnaire during a 24-week, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 4 trial (November 2006 to November 2009). Older outpatients (≥ 65 years) with major depressive disorder (DSM-IV criteria) were randomly assigned to duloxetine 60 mg/d (n = 249) or placebo (n = 121) for the 12-week acute phase, after which the duloxetine dose could be increased to 120 mg/d and nonresponding placebo patients could be switched to duloxetine 60 mg/d. Between-treatment differences in percentages of patients with fall events were compared by Fisher exact test. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIRs) of falls per patient-year were also estimated. RESULTS: In the acute phase, 17.3% of patients treated with duloxetine 60 mg versus 11.6% treated with placebo (P = .170) experienced a fall event. Over 24 weeks, the percentage of patients with a fall while taking duloxetine 60 mg versus placebo was 24.0% versus 15.7% (P = .078), and the percentage was significantly higher in patients taking duloxetine regardless of dose (25.3%) than with placebo (15.7%, P = .045). Between-treatment differences in EAIRs over 12 weeks (0.26; 95% CI, -0.20 to 0.72) and over 24 weeks (0.27; 95% CI, -0.10 to 0.65) were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Direct assessment of fall events greatly increases the number of falls reported by patients. Although the EAIR of falls per patient-year associated with duloxetine was not significant in this trial, clinicians should remain vigilant about the possibility of falls in older patients with duloxetine or any antidepressant treatment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00406848.

A cohort study of the risk of seizures in a pediatric population treated with atomoxetine or stimulant medications.

PURPOSE: Stimulant medications used for treating attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) can be associated with an increased risk of seizures. Atomoxetine is a non-stimulant medication approved for treating ADHD. This retrospective cohort analysis evaluated risk of seizures among pediatric patients naïve to ADHD medication therapy, with exposure to atomoxetine relative to stimulant medications. METHODS: Among members of a large US health plan from 1/1/2003 to 12/31/2006, aged 6-17 years, we identified initiators of atomoxetine or stimulants with no evidence of prior study drug use. We created study cohorts using propensity score matching within 6-month calendar blocks. The outcome was a seizure event in the 6-month follow-up period verified through medical record review. Relative risks (RR) based on current use of each study drug adjusted for baseline covariates were calculated using Poisson regression. We estimated hazard ratios from Cox proportional hazards models for the comparison of atomoxetine to stimulants based on initial cohort assignment. RESULTS: We matched 13,398 initiators of atomoxetine to 13,322 initiators of stimulants. We identified 97 seizure events. After adjustment, current atomoxetine therapy was associated with a non-statistically significant 28% lower risk of seizure compared to current stimulant therapy (RR 0.72; 95%CI 0.37, 1.38). The adjusted RR of seizure with atomoxetine compared to stimulants based on initial cohort assignment was 0.90 (95%CI 0.54, 1.49). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support an increase in the risk of seizure with atomoxetine therapy. The risk of seizure was not significantly different between pediatric patients taking atomoxetine compared with those taking stimulants.

Effect of atomoxetine on Tanner stage sexual development in children and adolescents with attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder: 18-month results from a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of long-term atomoxetine treatment on sexual development in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) as compared with placebo and with a national US survey in non-Hispanic white children and adolescents. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, relapse prevention, multicenter trial was conducted in pediatric patients (6-15 years) with DSM-IV diagnosed ADHD and lasting for ∼ 18 months. All patients received 10 weeks of open-label atomoxetine treatment (0.5-1.8 mg/kg/day). Patients responding in the last 2 weeks of treatment were randomized to double-blind treatment with either placebo or atomoxetine for up to 9 months, after which atomoxetine patients were re-randomized to either continued atomoxetine treatment or to placebo for up to another 6 months. Patients randomized to placebo at first randomization remained on placebo. The Tanner stage was assessed by the investigator at baseline and at approximately 6, 12, and 18 months, and the rate of sexual development (change in the Tanner stage) was compared between treatment groups. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences were observed between treatment groups either in sexual development (mean time, in days, to the first Tanner stage change: atomoxetine, 464.3 ± 23.0; placebo, 433.1 ± 14.4; p = 0.33) or in the duration of treatment exposure (atomoxetine, 315.3 days; placebo, 315.1 days; p = 0.90). Similar proportions of patients had at least one Tanner stage increase (atomoxetine: 27.1%; placebo: 31.9%; p = 0.39). Proportions of patients in each baseline Tanner stage group moving to higher stages were not statistically significantly different (p = 0.88, p = 0.18, p > 0.99, p = 0.68 for baseline Tanner stages 1-4, respectively). The puberty onset age was similar across treatment groups and consistent with US normative data. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term atomoxetine treatment was not associated with any appreciable impact on or delay in sexual maturation in children with ADHD compared with US normative data. LIMITATIONS: Study limitations include the relatively short duration of exposure to atomoxetine treatment, and the fact that half of the patients had been previously treated with stimulants. In addition, the Tanner stage data were collected as a secondary measure.

Atomoxetine and cerebrovascular outcomes in adults.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to estimate the association between atomoxetine and cerebrovascular accident (CVA) and transient ischemic attack (TIA) in adults. METHODS: This cohort study conducted within a health insurance database included 21,606 atomoxetine initiators matched to 21,606 stimulant attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) medication initiators on the basis of propensity scores and a sample from the source population (N = 42,993). Outcomes were confirmed through a medical record review or a National Death Index search. Poisson regression was used to estimate the rate ratio and 95% confidence interval (CI) of CVA or TIA according to the treatment. Cox regression was used to estimate the hazards ratio (HR) and 95% CI for comparisons across cohorts. RESULTS: Forty-four CVAs and 21 TIAs occurred during a mean follow-up of 1.5 years. The rate ratio of the current atomoxetine compared with the current stimulant ADHD medication was 1.38 for CVA (95% CI, 0.42-4.54) and 0.31 for TIA (95% CI, 0.04-2.63). Results for atomoxetine compared with the stimulant ADHD medication according to initial cohort assignment were consistent, with no increased risk for CVA or TIA. An increased risk of TIA was observed between initiation of an ADHD medication compared with the general population (HR, 3.44; 95% CI, 1.13-10.60); however, a similar pattern was not observed for CVA (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.34-1.47). CONCLUSIONS: These results do not support an increased risk of CV events with atomoxetine compared with the stimulant ADHD medication. Users of ADHD medications may be at an increased risk of TIA compared with the general population.

Hepatic events associated with atomoxetine treatment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This study describes and assesses potential hepatobiliary events related to atomoxetine therapy, as reported in clinical trials and as spontaneous adverse event reports post-launch in 2002. METHODS: Case reports that contained potential hepatobiliary events were identified by a computerized search of the Eli Lilly and Company atomoxetine spontaneous adverse events and clinical trials databases. All cases were reviewed by at least two company physicians, one with expertise in hepatology, to determine the relevance of the information in respect of potential liver toxicity. RESULTS: Of 7961 paediatric and adult patients treated with atomoxetine in clinical trials, 41 were identified as having hepatobiliary events requiring additional analysis. Most of these events were mild increases in ALT and AST levels. None of these cases met Hy's rule criteria or progressed to liver failure. During the 4 years after market launch, 351 spontaneous reports of adverse events were related to the liver, of which 69 had other explanations unrelated to atomoxetine. Of the remaining 282 cases, 133 contained possible confounding factors (and were deemed to be possibly related), 146 presented too little information to assess, and three suggested atomoxetine as a probable cause of liver injuries. One of the three had a positive rechallenge. All three patients recovered after discontinuation of the drug. CONCLUSIONS: Since the launch of atomoxetine therapy, three spontaneously reported cases of reversible drug-induced liver injury were deemed probably related to it. Atomoxetine should be discontinued in patients with jaundice or laboratory evidence of liver injury and should not be restarted.

Atomoxetine for the treatment of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and oppositional defiant disorder.

OBJECTIVE: In this study we examined the effectiveness of atomoxetine for the treatment of oppositional defiant disorder comorbid with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. METHODS: Patients were aged 6 to 12 years and met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, diagnostic criteria for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder with a Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder subscale score above age and gender norms; Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Scale score of > or = 4; and Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised oppositional defiant disorder subscale score of > or = 15. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive 1.2 mg/kg per day of atomoxetine (n = 156) or placebo (n = 70) for 8 weeks. Treatment effect on oppositional defiant disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms was measured by using the investigator-rated Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised. RESULTS: Repeated-measures analysis demonstrated a statistically significant difference favoring atomoxetine over placebo in the reduction of Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised oppositional defiant disorder total scores. There were significant pairwise treatment differences at weeks 2 and 5 but not at week 8 postbaseline. A last-observation-carried-forward analysis showed Swanson, Nolan, and Pelham Rating Scale-Revised scores at endpoint for the atomoxetine and placebo groups were significantly different for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms but not for oppositional defiant disorder symptoms. Atomoxetine was superior to placebo in a last-observation-carried-forward analysis of Clinical Global Impression-Improvement and Clinical Global Impression-Severity scores. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms previous findings that patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and comorbid oppositional defiant disorder show statistically and clinically significant improvement in attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder symptoms and global clinical functioning when treated with atomoxetine. It remains uncertain, however, whether atomoxetine exerts a specific and enduring effect on oppositional defiant disorder symptoms.

Meta-analysis of suicide-related behavior events in patients treated with atomoxetine.

OBJECTIVE: The present work examined suicide-related events in acute, double-blind, and placebo- or active comparator-controlled trials with atomoxetine. METHOD: Fourteen trials in pediatric patients were included. Potential events were identified in the adverse events database using a text-string search. Potential suicide-related events were categorized according to U.S. Food and Drug Administration-defined codes using blinded patient summaries. The meta-analyses used the Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio methods. RESULTS: No patient in atomoxetine attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) trials committed suicide. The frequency of suicidal ideation was 0.37% (5/1357) in pediatric patients taking atomoxetine versus 0% (0/851) for the placebo group; Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference of 0.46 (95% confidence interval 0.09-0.83; p =.016) and Mantel-Haenszel risk ratio of 2.92 (95% confidence interval 0.63-13.57; p =.172). Frequencies of suicide-related events in pediatric patients with ADHD did not differ between methylphenidate and atomoxetine treatments (Mantel-Haenszel incidence difference of -0.12 (95% confidence interval -0.62 to 0.38; p =.649). The number needed to harm in pediatric patients for an additional suicide-related event is 227 compared to the number needed to treat of five to achieve remission of ADHD symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Although uncommon, suicidal ideation was significantly more frequent in pediatric ADHD patients treated with atomoxetine compared to those treated with placebo. Retrospective analysis has limitations in ascertaining intent.

Efficacy and safety of atomoxetine in adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder and major depression.

This double-blind study examined efficacy and safety of atomoxetine (ATX; < or =1.8mg/kg per day) in adolescents aged 12-18 with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses of both attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and co-morbid major depressive disorder (MDD). Diagnoses were confirmed by the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version and persistently elevated scores on the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV, Parent version, Investigator-administered and -scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv, > or =1.5 standard deviations above age and gender norms) and Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R, > or = 40). Patients were treated for approximately 9 weeks with ATX (n = 72) or placebo (n = 70). Mean decrease in ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv total score was significantly greater in the ATX group (-13.3 +/- 10.0) compared with the placebo group (-5.1 +/- 9.9; p < 0.001). Mean CDRS-R score improvement was not significantly different between groups (ATX, -14.8 +/- 13.3; placebo, -12.8 +/- 10.4). Rates of treatment-emergent mania did not differ between groups (ATX, 0.0%; placebo, 1.5%). ATX treatment was associated with significantly more nausea and decreased appetite (p = 0.002; p = 0.003). No spontaneously reported adverse events involving suicidal ideation or suicidal behavior occurred in either group. ATX was an effective and safe treatment for ADHD in adolescents with ADHD and MDD. However, this trial showed no evidence for ATX of efficacy in treating MDD.

Transition from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder--a preliminary tolerability and efficacy study.

BACKGROUND: The primary treatment for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has been psychostimulants. Recently developed nonpsychostimulant treatments have allowed certain patients to switch from a psychostimulant to a nonpsychostimulant. However, the outcomes of such switches have not been systematically studied. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this pilot study was to assess treatment tolerance and efficacy during a cross-taper transition from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine among children and adolescents with ADHD. METHODS: This pilot study was conducted in patients (aged 6-17 years) with incomplete responses (failure to obtain full reduction/elimination of symptoms) or intolerance of adverse events (AEs) during psychostimulant treatment. Patients continued ongoing psychostimulant treatment during the first week of the study. Transition to atomoxetine began by administering atomoxetine 0.5 mg/kg . d plus full-dose psychostimulant for 1 week, followed in the second week by 1.2 mg/kg . d atomoxetine plus half-dose psychostimulant. Patients remained on 1.2 mg/kg . d atomoxetine monotherapy for the remaining 5 weeks. This stepwise transition was enacted due to the difference in pharmacodynamics between the psychostimulants and atomoxetine. Applying a stepwise cross-titration allowed for better control of ADHD symptoms during the intervening period. Change in ADHD symptoms, as measured by the mean change in the Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder Rating Scale-IV-Parent Version: Investigator-administered and -scored (ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv), was assessed from baseline to end point. RESULTS: Of the 62 subjects enrolled in the study, 39 (62.9%) were diagnosed as ADHD-combined type. Similar proportions were receiving methylphenidate (51.6%) and amphetamine (48.4%). Slightly more wished to switch due to inadequate response (53.2%) than intolerability (46.8%). Nine subjects discontinued at various times during the course of the study (patient or parent/caregiver decision [4], AE [2], protocol violation [2], and lack of efficacy [1]). Mean (SD) ADHDRS-IV-Parent:Inv total scores (n = 59, last-observation-carried-forward) improved significantly from baseline (visit 2) to an end point (32.1 [10.5] vs 22.6 [14.0]; P < 0.001). Of the 58 subjects answering in the atomoxetine monotherapy phase, 38 (65.5%) reported a preference for atomoxetine treatment over their previous psychostimulant. Tolerability results were as follows: 26 (44.1%) of 59 patients reported >or=1 AE, the most common being somnolence (4 [6.8%]), fatigue (3 [5.1%]), decreased appetite (3 [5.1%]), cough (3 [5.1%]), headache (3 [5.1%]), and contact dermatitis (2 [3.4%]). No clinically severe AEs were reported. Both mean (SD) diastolic (2.4 [7.8] mm Hg; P = 0.031) and systolic (2.4 [7.9] mm Hg; P = 0.029) blood pressures increased significantly from baseline to end point. Electrocardiography revealed a significant increase in mean (SD) heart rate (9.2 [11.6] bpm; P < 0.001) and a corresponding decrease in mean (SD) RR interval (-77.8 [98.2] ms; P < 0.001). Statistically significant, but mild, increases in diastolic pressure and heart rate were observed. CONCLUSION: These children and adolescent patients were successfully switched from methylphenidate or amphetamine to atomoxetine treatment, with resulting improvement in ADHD symptom severity from baseline in this pilot study.

Atomoxetine pharmacokinetics in healthy Chinese subjects and effect of the CYP2D6*10 allele.

AIMS: To characterize atomoxetine pharmacokinetics, explore the effect of the homozygous CYP2D6*10 genotype on atomoxetine pharmacokinetics and evaluate the tolerability of atomoxetine, in healthy Chinese subjects. METHODS: Twenty-four subjects, all CYP2D6 extensive metabolizers (EM), were randomized to receive atomoxetine (40 mg qd for 3 days, then 80 mg qd for 7 days) or matching placebo (2 : 1 ratio) in a double-blind fashion. Atomoxetine serum concentrations were measured following single (40 mg) and multiple (80 mg) doses. Adverse events, clinical safety laboratory data and vital signs were assessed during the study. RESULTS: Atomoxetine was rapidly absorbed with median time to maximum serum concentrations of approximately 1.5 h after single and multiple doses. Atomoxetine concentrations appeared to decrease monoexponentially with a mean apparent terminal half-life (t(1/2)) of approximately 4 h. The apparent clearance, apparent volume of distribution and t(1/2) following single and multiple doses were similar, suggesting linear pharmacokinetics with respect to time. Homozygous CYP2D6*10 subjects had 50% lower clearances compared with other EM subjects, resulting in twofold higher mean exposures. No clinically significant changes or abnormalities were noted in laboratory data and vital signs. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacokinetics of atomoxetine in healthy Chinese subjects appears comparable to other ethnic populations. Multiple dosing of 80 mg qd atomoxetine was well tolerated in this study.

Seizure risk in patients with attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder treated with atomoxetine.

The comorbidity of seizures, epilepsy, and attention-deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) prompted the examination of whether atomoxetine use for ADHD is associated with an increased risk of seizures. Seizures and seizure-related symptoms were reviewed from two independent Eli Lilly and Company databases: the atomoxetine clinical trials database and the atomoxetine postmarketing spontaneous adverse event database. Review of clinical trial data indicated that the crude incidence rates of seizure adverse events were between 0.1 and 0.2%, and were not significantly different between atomoxetine, placebo, and methylphenidate. Only 2% of the postmarketing spontaneous reports of seizure events were classified as having no clear contributing or confounding factors, and the reporting rate (8 per 100 000 patients exposed) was within the expected range of population-based incidence. Although children with ADHD are increasingly recognized as being at an elevated risk for seizures, treatment of ADHD symptoms with atomoxetine does not appear to elevate this risk further. The shared vulnerability between ADHD and seizure activity should be taken into account when making treatment decisions for populations of children with epilepsy and children with ADHD.