Vilazodone efficacy in subgroups of patients with major depressive disorder: a post-hoc analysis of four randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

The efficacy of antidepressants to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) varies by patient characteristics. This post-hoc analysis evaluated the effects of vilazodone across patient subgroups in adults with MDD. Data were pooled from four trials of vilazodone (NCT00285376, NCT00683592, NCT01473394, and NCT01473381). Mean change from baseline to week 8 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, MADRS response (≥50% total score improvement), and MADRS remission (total score≤10) were analyzed in the pooled intent-to-treat population (vilazodone=1254, placebo=964) and in subgroups of patients categorized by sex, age, MDD duration, recurrent episodes, baseline MADRS total score, and current episode duration. MADRS total score improvement was significantly greater with vilazodone versus placebo in the intent-to-treat population and in all patient subgroups (P<0.001). MADRS response and remission rates significantly separated from placebo (P<0.05) regardless of age, sex, MDD duration, recurrent MDD, and baseline symptom severity [except remission in patients with very severe baseline symptoms (MADRS score≥35)] and in patients with a shorter current episode duration (≤12 months). Despite the limitations associated with analyzing uncommon outcomes (e.g. MADRS remission) in small subgroups, vilazodone was an effective treatment in multiple patient populations, including those where reduced efficacy has previously been reported: males, older individuals, patients with a longer duration of MDD, and patients with recurrent depression.

Effects of vilazodone on suicidal ideation and behavior in adults with major depressive disorder or generalized anxiety disorder: post-hoc analysis of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation and behavior are ongoing concerns with antidepressants. Vilazodone, currently approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, has also been evaluated in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Post-hoc analyses of vilazodone trials were carried out to examine its effects on suicidal ideation and behavior in adults with MDD or GAD. Data were pooled from vilazodone trials in MDD (four studies) and GAD (three studies). The incidence of suicide-related events was analyzed on the basis of treatment-emergent adverse event reporting and Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) monitoring. Treatment-emergent suicidal ideation was analyzed on the basis of a C-SSRS category shift from no suicidal ideation/behavior (C-SSRS=0) at baseline to suicide ideation (C-SSRS=1-5) during treatment. In pooled safety populations (MDD, n=2233; GAD, n=1475), suicide-related treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in less than 1% of vilazodone-treated and placebo-treated patients. Incidences of C-SSRS suicidal ideation were as follows: MDD (vilazodone=19.9%, placebo=24.7%); GAD (vilazodone=7.7%, placebo=9.4%). Shifts from no suicidal ideation/behavior at baseline to suicidal ideation during treatment were as follows: MDD (vilazodone=9.4%, placebo=10.3%); GAD (vilazodone=4.4%, placebo=6.1%). Data from placebo-controlled studies indicate little or no risk of treatment-emergent suicidal ideation or behavior with vilazodone in adults with MDD or GAD. Nevertheless, all patients should be monitored for suicidal thoughts and behaviors during antidepressant treatment.

Effects of vilazodone on sexual functioning in healthy adults: results from a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, and active-controlled study.

The aim of this study is to evaluate the effects of vilazodone on sexual functioning in healthy, sexually active adults and assess the impact of medication nonadherence in this type of trial. Participants were randomized to vilazodone (20 or 40 mg/day), paroxetine (20 mg/day), or placebo for 5 weeks of double-blind treatment. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to day 35 in Change in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ) total score in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Post-hoc analyses were carried out in modified intent-to-treat (mITT) populations that excluded participants in the active-treatment groups with undetectable plasma drug concentrations at all visits (mITT-I) or at least one visit (mITT-II). In the ITT population (N=199), there were no statistically significant differences between any treatment groups for CSFQ total score change: placebo, -1.0; vilazodone 20 mg/day, -1.4; vilazodone 40 mg/day, -1.9; and paroxetine, -3.5. In mITT-I (N=197) and mITT-II (N=159), CSFQ total score change was not significantly different between vilazodone (either dose) versus placebo; the CSFQ total score decreased significantly (P<0.05) with paroxetine versus both placebo and vilazodone 20 mg/day, but not versus vilazodone 40 mg/day. Vilazodone exerted no significant effect on sexual functioning in healthy adults. Medication nonadherence can alter study results and may be an important consideration in trials with volunteer participants.

Categorical improvements in disease severity in patients with major depressive disorder treated with vilazodone: post hoc analysis of four randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: In three 8-week studies of vilazodone 40 mg/d (NCT00285376, NCT00683592, and NCT01473394) and a 10-week study of vilazodone 20 or 40 mg/d (NCT01473381), adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) showed significantly greater improvement with vilazodone versus placebo in global disease severity as measured by mean change from baseline in Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S) score. To assess the proportion of patients achieving clinically meaningful improvement, a post hoc pooled analysis was conducted using categorical shifts in disease severity based on CGI-S scores at baseline and end of treatment (EOT). METHODS: Analyses were conducted in the pooled intent-to-treat population (N=2,218). Definitions of categorical shifts included CGI-S ≥4 (moderately ill or worse) at baseline to CGI-S ≤2 (normal or borderline ill) at EOT; CGI-S ≥5 (markedly ill or worse) at baseline to CGI-S ≤2 at EOT; and CGI-S ≥6 (severely ill or worse) at baseline to CGI-S ≤3 (mildly ill or better) at EOT. RESULTS: At baseline, 2,217 patients were moderately ill or worse. The percentage who improved to normal or borderline ill was significantly higher with vilazodone than with placebo (40.0% versus 27.8%; odds ratio [OR] =1.7, P<0.001; number needed to treat [NNT] =9). In the 979 patients who were markedly ill or worse at baseline, the percentage who improved to normal or borderline ill was significantly higher with vilazodone than with placebo (36.8% versus 25.5%; OR =1.7, P<0.001; NNT =9). The small number of severely ill patients at baseline (n =43) provided inadequate power to detect statistically significant between-group differences, but an NNT =5 was found for improvement to mildly ill or better. CONCLUSION: Categorical shift analyses, defined using baseline and EOT CGI-S scores, showed that significantly higher proportions of patients had clinically meaningful improvements in global disease severity with vilazodone 20-40 mg/d versus placebo. This type of analysis may be useful for evaluating the effects of antidepressant treatment in adults with MDD.

Post Hoc Analyses of Anxiety Measures in Adult Patients With Generalized Anxiety Disorder Treated With Vilazodone.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate vilazodone, currently approved for major depressive disorder in adults, for generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). METHOD: Three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies showing positive results for vilazodone (2,040 mg/d) in adult patients with GAD (DSM-IV-TR) were pooled for analyses; data were collected from June 2012 to March 2014. Post hoc outcomes in the pooled intent-to-treat population (n = 1,462) included mean change from baseline to week 8 in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS) total score, psychic and somatic anxiety subscale scores, and individual item scores; HARS response (≥ 50% total score improvement) and remission (total score ≤ 7) at week 8; and category shifts, defined as HARS item score ≥ 2 at baseline (moderate to very severe symptoms) and score of 0 at week 8 (no symptoms). RESULTS: The least squares mean difference was statistically significant for vilazodone versus placebo in change from baseline to week 8 in HARS total score (-1.83, P < .0001) and in psychic anxiety (-1.21, P < .0001) and somatic anxiety (-0.63, P < .01) subscale scores; differences from placebo were significant on 11 of 14 HARS items (P < .05). Response rates were higher with vilazodone than placebo (48% vs 39%, P < .001), as were remission rates (27% vs 21%, P < .01). The percentage of patients who shifted to no symptoms was significant for vilazodone on several items: anxious mood, tension, intellectual, depressed mood, somatic-muscular, somatic-sensory, cardiovascular, respiratory, and autonomic symptoms (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with vilazodone versus placebo was effective in adult GAD patients, with significant differences between treatment groups found on both psychic and somatic HARS items. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01629966, NCT01766401, NCT01844115.

Levomilnacipran Extended-Release Treatment in Patients With Major Depressive Disorder: Improvements in Functional Impairment Categories.

OBJECTIVE: In this post hoc analysis, improvement in functional impairment in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) treated with levomilnacipran extended release (ER) was evaluated by assessing shifts from more severe to less severe functional impairment categories on individual Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) subscales. METHOD: SDS data were pooled from 5 phase II/III studies conducted between December 2006 and March 2012 of levomilnacipran ER versus placebo in adult patients with MDD (DSM-IV-TR criteria). Proportions of patients shifting from moderate-extreme baseline impairment (score ≥ 4) to mild-no impairment (score ≤ 3) at end of treatment were assessed for each SDS subscale. Proportions of patients shifting from marked-extreme (score ≥ 7) baseline impairment to moderate-no (score ≤ 6) or mild-no impairment (score ≤ 3) at end of treatment, and shifts in which patients worsened from moderate-no to marked-extreme impairment, were also evaluated. RESULTS: A significantly higher proportion of patients treated with levomilnacipran ER than placebo-treated patients improved from more severe categories of functional impairment at baseline to less severe impairment categories across all SDS subscales: work/school, social life, and family life/home responsibilities (P < .01). Depending on the SDS subscale, 48%-55% of levomilnacipran ER-treated patients with moderate-extreme impairment at baseline improved to mild or no impairment, compared with no more than 40% of placebo patients on any subscale. Almost half (42%-47%) of levomilnacipran ER-treated patients versus only about one-third (29%-34%) of placebo patients improved from marked-extreme to mild or no impairment across functional domains. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that functional improvement was observed across the SDS functional domains. To our knowledge, this is the first such categorical analysis of functional improvement, as measured by the SDS, for an antidepressant. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00969709, NCT01377194, NCT00969150, and NCT01034462 and EudraCT identifier: 2006-002404-34.

Evaluating the efficacy of vilazodone in achieving remission in patients with major depressive disorder: post-hoc analyses of a phase IV trial.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of vilazodone using different definitions of remission. Post-hoc analyses were carried out using data from an 8-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of vilazodone 40 mg/day in adults with major depressive disorder (NCT01473394). The primary efficacy endpoint was a mean change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score; additional measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) scores. In addition to treatment response (MADRS≥50% improvement), post-hoc analyses were carried out for remission of depressive symptoms [MADRS score≤10; MADRS≤5 (complete remission)], anxiety symptoms (HAMA≤7), and combined depression and anxiety symptoms (MADRS/HAMA≤10/≤7), as well as for overall symptom severity (CGI-S=1). Odds ratios (ORs) and numbers needed to treat (NNTs) were also calculated. Significant outcomes were obtained with vilazodone versus placebo for MADRS response (50.6 vs. 33.3%, OR=2.04, P<0.001, NNT=6), remission (34.0 vs. 21.8%, OR=1.82, P=0.003, NNT=9), and complete remission (18.2 vs. 8.3%, OR=2.42, P=0.002, NNT=11). More patients receiving vilazodone rather than placebo also met remission criteria for HAMA (48.8 vs. 35.2%, OR=1.82, P=0.002, NNT=8), MADRS/HAMA (32.1 vs. 20.4%, OR=1.83, P=0.004, NNT=9), and CGI-S (24.1 vs. 11.5%, OR=2.41, P<0.001, NNT=8). Treatment with vilazodone 40 mg/day may help adult patients with major depressive disorder achieve remission of depression and/or anxiety symptoms.

Efficacy of levomilnacipran extended-release in major depressive disorder: pooled analysis of 5 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVE: Post hoc analyses were conducted to evaluate the efficacy of levomilnacipran extended-release (ER) in subgroups of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Data were pooled from 5 completed Phase II/III studies. Patients were categorized by sex, age, MDD duration, recurrence of MDD, current episode duration, number of prior episodes, and baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. Efficacy was evaluated by MADRS least squares (LS) mean change from baseline, response (MADRS improvement ≥50%), and remission (MADRS ≤10). RESULTS: In the pooled population, treatment with levomilnacipran ER versus placebo resulted in greater improvement in MADRS score (-15.8 versus -12.9; LS mean difference, -2.9; P < .001) and higher response rates (44.7% versus 34.5%; P < .001). Comparable treatment effects were found in most subgroups. Remission rates in the overall population were higher for levomilnacipran ER versus placebo (27.7% versus 21.5%; P < .05); notably high remission rates were seen in patients with baseline MADRS score < 30 (48.8% versus 28.9%; P < .001). Discussion Clinically meaningful improvements in depressive symptoms were found across subgroups, including statistically significant outcomes for both response and remission. CONCLUSION: Levomilnacipran ER was efficacious across a wide range of MDD patients, including men and women, ages 18-78, with varying histories and symptom severity.

A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial of the Efficacy and Safety of Levomilnacipran ER 40-120mg/day for Prevention of Relapse in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Major depressive disorder is often chronic, with relapse and recurrence common. Levomilnacipran extended-release is a potent and selective serotonin and reuptake inhibitor approved in the United States for treatment of major depressive disorder in adults. The objective of this study (NCT01085812) was to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of levomilnacipran extended-release in the prevention of relapse in patients with major depressive disorder. DESIGN: A 24-week Phase III randomized, double-blind, controlled trial comparing levomilnacipran extended-release 40-120mg/day with placebo for relapse prevention in patients with major depressive disorder who had responded to 12-week, open-label treatment with levomilnacipran extended-release. Statistical power was calculated on the assumption that 38 percent of placebo and 20 percent of levomilnacipran extended-release patients would relapse. SETTING: Thirty-six outpatient study centers throughout the United States and Canada. PARTICIPANTS: Of 348 patients who met randomization criteria and entered double-blind treatment, three discontinued prior to treatment, 112 were randomized to placebo, and 233 to levomilnacipran extended-release. PRIMARY OUTCOME: Time to relapse was analyzed using the Cox proportional hazard-regression model with treatment group and baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score as explanatory variables. Safety was also evaluated. RESULTS: Time to relapse was longer for levomilnacipran extended-release versus placebo (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval] = 0.68 [0.40][1.17]), but the treatment difference was not statistically significant (P=0.165). A relatively low percentage of patients from either group relapsed (placebo=20.5%, levomilnacipran extended-release=13.9%). CONCLUSION: This study did not detect between-treatment group differences, potentially due to lower than expected relapse rates in the placebo group. Levomilnacipran extended-release was generally well tolerated.

A phase III, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study of levomilnacipran extended-release in patients with major depressive disorder.

Levomilnacipran (1S, 2R-milnacipran) is a potent and selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor; an extended-release (ER) formulation allows for once-daily dosing. This phase III study (NCT01034462) evaluated the efficacy, the safety, and the tolerability of 40 to 120 mg/d of levomilnacipran ER versus placebo in the treatment of patients (18-80 y) with major depressive disorder. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, flexible-dose study comprised a 1-week single-blind, placebo run-in period; an 8-week double-blind treatment; and a 2-week double-blind down-taper period. The primary efficacy parameter was total score change from baseline to week 8 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS); the secondary efficacy was the Sheehan Disability Scale. Analysis was performed using the mixed-effects model for repeated measures on a modified intent-to-treat population. A total of 434 patients received at least 1 dose of double-blind treatment (safety population); 429 patients also had 1 or more postbaseline MADRS assessments (modified intent-to-treat population). The least squares mean differences and 95% confidence interval were statistically significant in favor of levomilnacipran ER versus placebo for the MADRS total score (-3.095 [-5.256, -0.935]; P = 0.0051) and the SDS total score (-2.632 [-4.193, -1.070]; P = 0.0010) change from baseline to week 8. Adverse events were reported in 61.8% of the placebo patients and in 81.6% of the levomilnacipran ER patients. Frequently reported adverse events (≥ 5% in levomilnacipran ER and twice the rate of placebo) were nausea, dizziness, constipation, tachycardia, urinary hesitation, hyperhidrosis, insomnia, vomiting, hypertension, and ejaculation disorder. In conclusion, there was a statistically significant difference in the score change from baseline to week 8 between levomilnacipran ER and placebo on several depression rating scales, reflecting symptomatic and functional improvement; treatment was generally well tolerated.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of flexible doses of levomilnacipran ER (40-120 mg/day) in patients with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Levomilnacipran ER is a potent and selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) approved for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). Efficacy and safety have been evaluated in five Phase II/III studies, four of which met the pre-specified primary efficacy outcome. Results of the negative trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00969150) are reported here. METHODS: A Phase III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comparing flexible-dose levomilnacipran ER 40-120 mg/day with placebo was conducted in outpatients with MDD. Patients met the DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD, had a current episode of depression of at least 4 weeks' duration, and a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥30. The study comprised a 1-week, single-blind, placebo lead-in, 8-week double-blind treatment, and a 2-week down-taper. The primary and secondary efficacy measures were change from baseline to Week 8 in MADRS and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total scores, respectively, analyzed using a mixed-effects model for repeated measures approach. Safety outcomes included adverse events (AEs), laboratory and vital sign measures, the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX). RESULTS: Three hundred and fifty-five patients received the study drug and had ≥1 post-baseline MADRS total score assessment (ITT Population); 81.9% of placebo and 77.1% of levomilnacipran ER patients completed the study. For levomilnacipran ER vs placebo, MADRS (-15.7 vs -14.2) and SDS (-8.8 vs -8.2) total score improvements, and rates of MADRS response (38.5% vs 34.8%) and remission (25.3% vs 23.8%) were numerically greater but differences were not statistically significant. Levomilnacipran ER was generally well tolerated. More levomilnacipran ER patients vs placebo reported AEs; the most common AEs for levomilnacipran ER were nausea (17%) and headache (16%). Mean changes in most safety measures were small and similar between groups. There were no meaningful differences in total ASEX scores between groups. LIMITATIONS: Short duration of treatment, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and lack of an active comparator. CONCLUSION: Numerical improvements for levomilnacipran ER vs placebo were detected in this study, but the differences were not statistically significant; levomilnacipran ER was generally well tolerated.

Efficacy and safety of levomilnacipran sustained release 40 mg, 80 mg, or 120 mg in major depressive disorder: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: This phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of fixed-dose levomilnacipran sustained release (SR) compared with placebo in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD); the study was conducted from September 2009-May 2011. METHOD: Outpatients met DSM-IV-TR criteria for MDD with an ongoing major depressive episode ≥ 8 weeks' duration. After a 1-week placebo lead-in, patients were randomly assigned to receive placebo (n = 179) or levomilnacipran SR 40 mg (n = 181), 80 mg (n = 181), or 120 mg (n = 183) once daily for 8 weeks of double-blind treatment, followed by a 2-week double-blind down-taper. The primary efficacy parameter was change from baseline on the clinician-rated Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. The prespecified secondary efficacy parameter was change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total score. Additional efficacy measures included the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS(17)) and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness (CGI-S) and -Improvement (CGI-I). Safety and tolerability were also evaluated. RESULTS: The least squares mean difference (LSMD) for change from baseline in MADRS total score was significantly superior to placebo for all dose groups: -3.23 (P = .0186), -3.99 (P = .0038), and -4.86 (P = .0005) for levomilnacipran SR 40, 80, and 120 mg, respectively. The LSMD was significantly different for levomilnacipran SR 80 mg and 120 mg versus placebo on the SDS (-2.51 and -2.57, respectively, P < .05 for both doses), HDRS(17) (-2.09 and -2.34, respectively, P < .05 for both doses), CGI-S (-0.43 [P < .01] and -0.35 [P < .05], respectively), and CGI-I (-0.34 and -0.32, respectively, P < .05 for both doses) assessments. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥ 10% of any treatment group) were headache, nausea, constipation, dry mouth, increased heart rate, and hyperhidrosis. CONCLUSIONS: Levomilnacipran SR demonstrated significant improvement in depressive symptoms and functioning relative to placebo. In this study, levomilnacipran SR was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00969709.