Henrik Loft

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, active reference study of Lu AA21004 in patients with major depressive disorder

The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of Lu AA21004 vs. placebo using venlafaxine XR as active reference in patients with DSM-IV-TR major depressive disorder (MDD) were evaluated. Lu AA21004 is a novel antidepressant that is a 5-HT3 and 5-HT7 receptor antagonist, 5-HT1A receptor agonist, 5-HT1B receptor partial agonist and inhibitor of the 5-HT transporter in recombinant cell lines. In this 6-wk, multi-site study, 429 patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to 5 or 10 mg Lu AA21004, placebo or 225 mg venlafaxine XR. All patients had a baseline Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ⩾30. The primary efficacy analysis was based on the MADRS total score adjusting for multiplicity using a hierarchical testing procedure starting with the highest dose vs. placebo. Lu AA21004 was statistically significantly superior to placebo (n=105) in mean change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 6 (p<0.0001, last observation carried forward), with a mean treatment difference vs. placebo of 5.9 (5 mg, n=108), and 5.7 (10 mg, n=100) points. Venlafaxine XR (n=112) was also significantly superior to placebo at week 6 (p<0.0001). In total, 30 patients withdrew due to adverse events (AEs) – placebo: four (4%); 5 mg Lu AA21004: three (3%); 10 mg Lu AA21004: seven (7%); and venlafaxine: 16 (14%). The most common AEs were nausea, headache, hyperhidrosis, and dry mouth. No clinically relevant changes over time were seen in the clinical laboratory results, vital signs, weight, or ECG parameters. In this study, treatment with 5 mg and 10 mg Lu AA21004 for 6 wk was efficacious and well tolerated in patients with MDD.

Escitalopram (S‐Enantiomer of Citalopram): Clinical Efficacy and Onset of Action Predicted from a Rat Model

Escitalopram is the active S-enantiomer of citalopram. In a chronic mild stress model of depression in rats, treatments with both escitalopram and citalopram were effective; however, a faster time to onset of efficacy compared to vehicle treatment was observed for escitalopram-treated (5 mg/kg/day) than for citalopram-treated (10 mg/kg/day) rats at Week 1. To study the predictability of this observation in the clinic, we analysed 4-week data from an 8-week, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study that compared escitalopram and citalopram to placebo in primary care patients with major depressive disorder (baseline Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores > or =22 and < or =40). Since the flexible dosing started after Week 4, analysis of 4-week data ensured that the patients received fixed doses of 10 mg/day escitalopram (155 patients), 20 mg/day citalopram (160 patients), or placebo (154 patients). The efficacy analysis showed a significantly superior therapeutic effect for escitalopram versus placebo from Week 1 onwards (observed cases) with an adjusted mean change in MADRS at Week 4 (last observation carried forward) of 2.7 points (P=0.002). By comparison, 20 mg/day citalopram did not demonstrate a statistically significant effect compared to placebo. Escitalopram was well tolerated with an adverse event profile similar to that of citalopram. The preclinical observation that escitalopram possesses a faster time to onset of efficacy than citalopram was also seen in primary care patients with major depressive disorder. Thus, escitalopram is efficacious in depression and the effect occurs earlier than for citalopram.

Efficacy and safety of vortioxetine (Lu AA21004), 15 and 20 mg/day: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, duloxetine-referenced study in the acute treatment of adult patients with major depressive disorder.

This study assessed the efficacy, tolerability and safety of vortioxetine versus placebo in adults with recurrent major depressive disorder. This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study included 608 patients [Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score≥26 and Clinical Global Impression – Severity score≥4]. Patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1 : 1) to vortioxetine 15 mg/day, vortioxetine 20 mg/day, duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 8 (mixed model for repeated measurements). Key secondary endpoints were: MADRS responders; Clinical Global Impression – Improvement scale score; MADRS total score in patients with baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale ≥20; remission (MADRS⩽10); and Sheehan Disability Scale total score at week 8. On the primary efficacy endpoint, both vortioxetine doses were statistically significantly superior to placebo, with a mean difference to placebo (n=158) of −5.5 (vortioxetine 15 mg, P<0.0001, n=149) and −7.1 MADRS points (vortioxetine 20 mg, P<0.0001, n=151). Duloxetine (n=146) separated from placebo, thus validating the study. In all key secondary analyses, both vortioxetine doses were statistically significantly superior to placebo. Vortioxetine treatment was well tolerated; common adverse events (incidence≥5%) were nausea, headache, diarrhea, dry mouth and dizziness. No clinically relevant changes were seen in clinical safety laboratory values, weight, ECG or vital signs parameters. Vortioxetine was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder.

A randomized clinical study of Lu AA21004 in the prevention of relapse in patients with major depressive disorder

The efficacy and tolerability of Lu AA21004 in the prevention of relapse of major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients in remission after acute treatment was evaluated. Patients (n=639) aged 18–75 years with a primary diagnosis of MDD with a current major depressive episode (MDE) ≥4 weeks’ duration, at least one prior MDE and a MADRS total score ≥26 received 12-week, open-label Lu AA21004 at 5 or 10mg/day. Patients in remission (MADRS ≤10) at both weeks 10 and 12 were assigned to double-blind treatment with either placebo or Lu AA21004 (fixed dose from Week 8).Patients (n=396) were treated, after random assignment to placebo (n=192) or Lu AA21004 (n=204). The primary analysis of time to relapse (full-analysis set, Cox proportional hazard model) showed a statistically significant difference in favour of Lu AA21004 versus placebo with a hazard ratio of 2.01 (95% confidence interval: 1.26–3.21; p=0.0035). The proportion of patients who relapsed was 13% in the Lu AA21004 group (n=27) and 26% in the placebo group (n=50). The withdrawal rates due to adverse events were 8% (open-label), and 3% (placebo) and 8% (Lu AA21004) (double-blind). Thus, Lu AA21004 was effective in preventing relapse of MDD and was well tolerated as maintenance treatment.

A meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials of vortioxetine for the treatment of major depressive disorder in adults

The efficacy and safety of vortioxetine, an antidepressant approved for the treatment of adults with major depressive disorder (MDD), was studied in 11 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of 6/8 weeks׳ treatment duration. An aggregated study-level meta-analysis was conducted to estimate the magnitude and dose-relationship of the clinical effect of approved doses of vortioxetine (5-20mg/day). The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to endpoint in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Differences from placebo were analyzed using mixed model for repeated measurements (MMRM) analysis, with a sensitivity analysis also conducted using last observation carried forward. Secondary outcomes included MADRS single-item scores, response rate (≥50% reduction in baseline MADRS), remission rate (MADRS ≤10), and Clinical Global Impressions scores. Across the 11 studies, 1824 patients were treated with placebo and 3304 with vortioxetine (5mg/day: n=1001; 10mg/day: n=1042; 15mg/day: n=449; 20mg/day: n=812). The MMRM meta-analysis demonstrated that vortioxetine 5, 10, and 20mg/day were associated with significant reductions in MADRS total score (Δ-2.27, Δ-3.57, and Δ-4.57, respectively; p<0.01) versus placebo. The effects of 15mg/day (Δ-2.60; p=0.105) were not significantly different from placebo. Vortioxetine 10 and 20mg/day were associated with significant reductions in 9 of 10 MADRS single-item scores. Vortioxetine treatment was also associated with significantly higher rates of response and remission and with significant improvements in other depression-related scores versus placebo. This meta-analysis of vortioxetine (5-20mg/day) in adults with MDD supports the efficacy demonstrated in the individual studies, with treatment effect increasing with dose.

PET measurement of serotonin transporter occupancy: a comparison of escitalopram and citalopram

The selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) citalopram (R,S-citalopram) is a racemic compound of two enantiomers. On the basis of in-vitro studies, inhibition of the human serotonin transporter (5-HTT) is achieved by the S-enantiomer (S-citalopram or escitalopram). The aim of the present PET study was to compare 5-HTT occupancy after single equimolar doses (with respect to S-enantiomer) in humans in vivo using R,S-citalopram (20 mg) and S-citalopram (10 mg) using PET and the radioligand [(11)C]MADAM. The design was a single-dose, double-blind, two-way crossover study in eight healthy male subjects. The 5-HTT binding potential at baseline and after single doses of study drugs was used to calculate 5-HTT occupancy in seven brain regions. Serum concentrations of the study drugs were determined in order to calculate the apparent inhibition constant (K(i),(app)), a secondary parameter of interest for the comparison. In all brain regions examined, occupancy was numerically higher after treatment with R,S-citalopram [66+/-19% to 78+/-17% (mean+/-s.d.) depending on the region] than after S-citalopram (59+/-15% to 69+/-13%; overall comparison: F=14.8, d.f.=1, 90, p<0.001). In line with this the apparent inhibition constant was significantly lower for R,S-citalopram than for S-citalopram (overall comparison: F=6.7, d.f.=1, 90, p<0.05). The small but significant difference in occupancy and K(i),(app) found between R,S-citalopram and S-citalopram suggests that not only S-citalopram but also R-citalopram to some degree occupies the 5-HTT in the human brain in vivo.

The Effects of Vortioxetine on Cognitive Function in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Three Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Management of cognitive deficits in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) remains an important unmet need. This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of vortioxetine on cognition in patients with MDD. Methods: Random effects meta-analysis was applied to three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week trials of vortioxetine (5–20mg/day) in MDD, and separately to two duloxetine-referenced trials. The primary outcome measure was change in Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) score. Standardized effect sizes (SES) versus placebo (Cohen’s d) were used as input. Path analysis was employed to determine the extent to which changes in DSST were mediated independently of a change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. Meta-analysis was applied to MADRS-adjusted and -unadjusted SES values. Changes on additional cognitive tests were evaluated (source studies only). Results: Before adjustment for MADRS, vortioxetine separated from placebo on DSST score (SES 0.25–0.48; nominal p < 0.05) in all individual trials, and statistically improved DSST performance versus placebo in meta-analyses of the three trials (SES = 0.35; p < 0.0001) and two duloxetine-referenced trials (SES = 0.26; p = 0.001). After adjustment for MADRS, vortioxetine maintained DSST improvement in one individual trial (p = 0.001) and separation from placebo was maintained in meta-analyses of all three trials (SES = 0.24; p < 0.0001) and both duloxetine-referenced trials (SES 0.19; p = 0.01). Change in DSST with duloxetine failed to separate from placebo in individual trials and both meta-analyses. Change in DSST statistically favored vortioxetine versus duloxetine after MADRS adjustment (SES = 0.16; p = 0.04). Conclusions: Vortioxetine, but not duloxetine, significantly improved cognition, independent of depressive symptoms. Vortioxetine represents an important treatment for MDD-related cognitive dysfunction.

Lu AA21004, a multimodal psychotropic agent, in the prevention of relapse in adult patients with generalized anxiety disorder

The purpose of this study was to investigate the long-term maintenance of the efficacy of Lu AA21004 5 or 10 mg/day in the prevention of relapse in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Patients (n=687) with a primary diagnosis of GAD (DSM-IV criteria) and a baseline Hamilton Anxiety (HAM-A) total score of at least 20 underwent a 20-week, open-label Lu AA21004 treatment. In all, 459 patients responded and were randomized to 24–56 weeks of a double-blind treatment with Lu AA21004 (n=229) or placebo (n=230). The predefined primary efficacy endpoint was time to relapse (HAM-A total score ≥15) using a Cox model; the key secondary efficacy endpoint under multiplicity control was time to relapse for patients responding to treatment for at least 12 weeks. The primary analysis showed a statistically significant effect of Lu AA21004 relative to the placebo on the time to relapse of GAD, with a hazard ratio of 2.71 (P<0.001). There was a statistically significant effect of Lu AA21004 in the stable responders (hazard ratio=3.06, P<0.001). Lu AA21004 was well tolerated, with withdrawal rates due to adverse events of 9% (open-label) and 3% (placebo) and 4% (Lu AA21004) in the double-blind period. In this study, Lu AA21004 5 or 10 mg/day was efficacious in preventing relapse and was well tolerated in the maintenance treatment of GAD.

A 2-week efficacy and safety study of gaboxadol and zolpidem using electronic diaries in primary insomnia outpatients

OBJECTIVES To evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of gaboxadol, a selective extrasynaptic GABA(A) agonist (SEGA) previously in development for the treatment of insomnia. METHODS This was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 2-week, Phase III study of gaboxadol 5, 10 and 15mg in outpatients meeting the DSM-IV criteria of primary insomnia (N=742). Zolpidem 10mg was used as active reference. RESULTS At weeks 1 and 2, significant improvement in total sleep time (sTST) compared to placebo was seen for all doses of gaboxadol (all p<0.05). In addition, gaboxadol 10 and 15mg decreased the number of awakenings (sNAW) (p<0.05) while only gaboxadol 15mg improved wakefulness after sleep onset (sWASO) (p<0.05). At week 1, all doses of gaboxadol significantly improved time-to-sleep onset (sTSO) (p<0.05). At week 2, a sustained effect on sTSO was observed for gaboxadol 15mg. Zolpidem also showed effect on all of these variables. Gaboxadol and zolpidem improved sleep quality, freshness after sleep, daytime function and energy at both weeks. Transient rebound insomnia was observed following discontinuation of treatment with zolpidem, but not gaboxadol. CONCLUSIONS Gaboxadol 15mg treatment for 2 weeks significantly improved sleep onset and maintenance variables as well as sleep quality and daytime function, as did zolpidem. Gaboxadol 5 and 10mg also showed benefits on most efficacy variables. Gaboxadol was generally safe and well tolerated, with no evidence of withdrawal symptoms or rebound insomnia after discontinuation of short-term treatment. For zolpidem, transient rebound insomnia was observed.

Efficacy of intravenous citalopram compared with oral citalopram for severe depression. Safety and efficacy data from a double-blind, double-dummy trial.

BACKGROUND Intravenous administration is often beneficial in the treatment of severely depressed patients. It is mainly the tri- and tetracyclic antidepressant drugs that can be administered intravenously. However, these drugs have a less favourable safety profile than newer antidepressants, such as the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Citalopram is the only SSRI that is available in a formulation for infusion. This double-blind, randomised, multicentre trial was designed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of citalopram infusion (40 mg per day) and citalopram tablet (40 mg per day). METHODS Patients were randomised to receive either placebo tablet plus citalopram infusion (the infusion group; n=135) or citalopram tablet plus placebo infusion (the tablet group; n=119). After receiving randomised treatment for eight days, all patients entered an open treatment phase, during which they received oral citalopram 40 mg per day for five weeks. RESULTS Although there was no difference in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores at the end of the randomised treatment period, by the end of the open treatment phase the reduction in MADRS scores was significantly greater in the infusion group than in the tablet group (p=0.015). The infusion group also showed superior efficacy in Clinical Global Impressions assessments. Citalopram was equally well tolerated in both treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS This trial confirmed the efficacy of citalopram 40 mg per day, and clearly supports the use of citalopram infusion in the treatment of severely depressed, hospitalised patients.