Sharon L. Hoog

Fluoxetine for acute treatment of depression in children and adolescents: A placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trial

BACKGROUND This report presents results from the acute treatment phase of a clinical trial designed to confirm efficacy of a fixed dose of 20 mg of fluoxetine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). METHOD After a 3-week screening period, 122 children and 97 adolescents with MDD ( ) were randomly assigned to placebo or fluoxetine. After a 1-week placebo lead-in, fluoxetine-treated patients received fluoxetine 10 mg/day for 1 week, then fluoxetine 20 mg/day for 8 weeks. RESULTS Fluoxetine was associated with greater mean improvement in Childrens Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score than placebo after 1 week ( <.05) and throughout the study period. Significantly more fluoxetine-treated patients (41%) met the prospectively defined criteria for remission than did placebo-treated patients (20%) ( <.01). More fluoxetine- (65%) than placebo-treated (53%) patients met the prospectively defined response criterion of > or =30% decrease in CDRS-R score, but this difference was not significant ( =.093). Significantly more fluoxetine-than placebo-treated patients completed acute treatment ( =.001). There were no significant differences between treatment groups in discontinuations due to adverse events ( =.408). CONCLUSION Fluoxetine 20 mg daily appears to be well tolerated and effective for acute treatment of MDD in child and adolescent outpatients. Fluoxetine is the only antidepressant that has demonstrated efficacy in two placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials of pediatric depression.

Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor discontinuation syndrome: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND Recent reports describe discontinuation-emergent adverse events upon cessation of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors including dizziness, insomnia, nervousness, nausea, and agitation. We hypothesized that interruption of fluoxetine treatment would be associated with fewer discontinuation-emergent adverse events than interruption of sertraline or paroxetine treatment, based on fluoxetines longer half-life. METHODS In this 4-week study, 242 patients with remitted depression receiving maintenance therapy with open-label fluoxetine, sertraline, or paroxetine for 4-24 months had their maintenance therapy interrupted with double-blind placebo substitution for 5-8 days. The Symptom Questionnaire (SQ), the Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms checklist, the 28-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, and the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale were used to assess somatic distress and stability of antidepressant response. RESULTS Two hundred twenty patients (91%) completed the study. Following interruption of therapy, fluoxetine-treated patients experienced fewer discontinuation-emergent events than either sertraline-treated or paroxetine-treated patients (p < .001). The mean SQ somatic symptom scale score in fluoxetine-treated patients was significantly lower than that in sertraline-treated and paroxetine-treated patients (p < .001). Fluoxetine-treated patients also experienced less reemergence of depressive symptoms than sertraline-treated or paroxetine-treated patients (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS Abrupt interruption of antidepressant therapy for 5-8 days was associated with the emergence of new somatic and psychological symptoms in patients treated with paroxetine and to a lesser degree sertraline, with few symptoms seen with fluoxetine.

Fluoxetine treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder in children and adolescents : A placebo-controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE This study assesses the efficacy and tolerability of fluoxetine in the acute treatment of child and adolescent obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) during a 13-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHOD Eligible patients aged 7 to 17 (N = 103) were randomized at a ratio of 2:1 to receive either fluoxetine or placebo. Dosing was initiated at 10 mg daily for 2 weeks, then increased to 20 mg daily. After 4 weeks of treatment, and again after 7 weeks of treatment, non-responders could have their dosage increased by 20 mg daily, for a maximum possible dosage of 60 mg daily. Primary measure of efficacy was improvement in OCD symptoms as measured by the Childrens Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (CY-BOCS). All analyses were intent-to-treat. RESULTS Fluoxetine was associated with significantly greater improvement in OCD as assessed by the CY-BOCS (p = .026) and other measures than was placebo. Fluoxetine was well tolerated and had a rate of discontinuation for adverse events similar to that of placebo (p = 1.00). CONCLUSIONS Fluoxetine 20 to 60 mg daily was effective and well tolerated for treatment of OCD in this pediatric population.

Fluoxetine versus sertraline and paroxetine in major depression: tolerability and efficacy in anxious depression

BACKGROUND Major depression with high levels of anxiety (anxious depression) is a common subtype of depression associated with greater psychosocial impairment and poorer response to antidepressant treatment. It is unclear whether in this population there are differences in efficacy or tolerability across selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors. For this reason, using head-to-head acute treatment comparison, we compared efficacy and tolerability of fluoxetine, sertraline, and paroxetine among depressed patients with high levels of anxiety. METHODS Patients (N = 108) with DSM-IV major depression and high levels of anxiety (a HAM-D-Anxiety/Somatization Factor score > or =7) were randomized to fluoxetine, sertraline, or paroxetine treatment in a double-blind fashion. Changes in overall depression and anxiety were assessed. RESULTS Patients demonstrated similar baseline-to-endpoint improvement in HAM-D-17 and HAM-D-Anxiety/Somatization Factor scores. Patients also demonstrated similar change-over-time improvement in HAM-D-17 and HAM-D-Anxiety/Somatization Factor scores, except at week one where fluoxetine- and sertraline-treated patients had statistically significantly greater improvement than paroxetine-treated patients in the HAM-D-Anxiety/Somatization Factor score. There were no significant differences across treatments in percentages of patients with substantial emergence, any worsening, or improvement at endpoint in individual HAM-D Items 9 (agitation), 10 (psychic anxiety), and 11 (somatic anxiety). Overall, all treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSION These data showed no significant differences in efficacy and tolerability of fluoxetine, sertraline, and paroxetine in patients with high levels of baseline anxiety symptoms during the acute treatment of major depression. Each treatment was similarly effective in improving depression in this subtype of patients with anxious depression.

Acute efficacy of fluoxetine versus sertraline and paroxetine in major depressive disorder including effects of baseline insomnia.

This study assessed whether fluoxetine, sertraline, and paroxetine differ in efficacy and tolerability in depressed patients and the impact of baseline insomnia on outcomes. Patients (N = 284) with DSM-IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to fluoxetine, paroxetine, or sertraline for 10 to 16 weeks of treatment. Using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) sleep disturbance factor score, patients were categorized into low (<4) or high (≥4) baseline insomnia subgroups. Changes in depression and insomnia were assessed. Safety assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), reasons for discontinuation, and AEs leading to discontinuation. In addition, AEs were evaluated within insomnia subgroups to determine emergence of activation or sedation. Depression improvement, assessed with the HAM-D-17 total score, was similar among treatments in all patients (p = 0.365) and the high (p = 0.853) and low insomnia (p = 0.415) subgroups. Insomnia improvement, assessed with the HAM-D sleep disturbance factor score, was similar among treatments in all patients (p = 0.868) and in the high (p = 0.852) and low insomnia (p = 0.982) subgroups. Analyses revealed no significant differences between treatments in the percentages of patients with substantial worsening, any worsening, worsening at endpoint, or improvement at endpoint in the HAM-D sleep disturbance factor in either insomnia subgroup. Treatments were well tolerated in most patients. No significant differences between treatments in the incidence of AEs suggestive of activation or sedation were seen in the insomnia subgroups. These data show no significant differences in acute treatment efficacy and tolerability across fluoxetine, sertraline, and paroxetine in major depressive disorder patients. Improvement in overall depression and in associated insomnia was achieved by most patients regardless of baseline insomnia.

Delayed-start analysis: Mild Alzheimer's disease patients in solanezumab trials, 3.5 years

Solanezumab is an anti‐amyloid monoclonal antibody in clinical testing for treatment of Alzheimers disease (AD). Its mechanism suggests the possibility of slowing the progression of AD.

Duloxetine and Pregnancy Outcomes: Safety Surveillance Findings

Background: Duloxetine hydrochloride is approved for the treatment or management of major depressive disorder, generalized anxiety disorder, diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain, chronic musculoskeletal pain, and fibromyalgia in the United States. These conditions affect millions of women, including those of childbearing potential. In pregnancy, pharmacological treatment is justified only if the potential benefits outweigh potential risks to mother and fetus, neonate or infant. There are no adequate and well-controlled studies in pregnant women treated with duloxetine. Post-marketing surveillance is an important tool for the assessment of drug safety in pregnancy in a naturalistic setting. Objective: Using safety surveillance and spontaneous adverse events reporting databases, to provide pregnancy outcomes statistics as they relate to duloxetine exposure. Study design and Setting: This was an analysis of pregnancy outcome data captured in Lilly Safety System (LSS) (a safety database for the collection, storage, and reporting of adverse events involving Lilly Products), through October 31 2011 and the FDA Adverse Events Reporting System (AERS) database through September 30 2011. Both databases provided spontaneous reporting data from the time of first duloxetine marketing authorization in 2004; in addition, the LSS Database includes serious adverse event and pregnancy data from clinical trials since the creation of the database in 1983. Patients: Patients who had received duloxetine during pregnancy and reported pregnancy outcomes. Main outcome measures: Normal and abnormal pregnancy outcomes. Abnormal outcomes comprised spontaneous abortion, premature/post-term birth, congenital anomaly, perinatal/post-perinatal complication, still birth, and ectopic pregnancy. Descriptive statistics are provided for LSS data. A disproportionality analysis was performed using the Empirical Bayes Geometric Mean (EBGM) for the AERS data. The lower bound of the 90% confidence interval of EBGM (EB05) ≥1 was used as the threshold to determine disproportionality. Results: In the LSS analysis, 400 pregnancy cases with a known pregnancy outcome were identified. Of the 233 prospectively reported cases, 170 (73%) were spontaneous reports; the remainder were reported from clinical trials (58 [25%]) or post-marketing studies (5 [2%]). In most of these cases (74%), patients received duloxetine for the treatment of depression. Pregnancy outcomes were normal in 143 cases, and abnormal in 90 cases. Abnormal pregnancy outcomes were mainly spontaneous abortions (n=41), post/perinatal conditions (n=25) or premature births (n=19). In patients with abnormal pregnancy outcomes, relevant concomitant medication use and relevant medical history were more frequently reported, compared to those with normal pregnancy outcomes (p<0.05). For the AERS database analysis, EB05 was less than one for all clusters of abnormal pregnancy outcomes; there was no disproportionality of reporting adverse pregnancy outcomes for patients treated with duloxetine versus all other drugs or selected antidepressants. Conclusion: While limitations of these data are recognized, the information available to date from these two data sources suggest that the frequency of abnormal outcomes reported in duloxetine pregnancy cases is generally consistent with the historic control rates in the general population.

342. Fluoxetine versus sertraline and paroxetine in major depression: Safety and efficacy in anxious and nonanxious subgroups

Results:Withinbothlowandhighinsomniasubgroups,patientsdemonstrated similar improvementson the HAMD-17(low insomnia:fluoxetine, -10.4, *7.1; sertraline,-12.2, Y7.7;and paroxetine;-11.9, *6.6; p=().392 and high insomnia:fluoxetine,-13.2, t8.2; sertraline,-14.7, A7.5;and paroxetine;-12.9, t8.5; P=O.545)and on the HAMDSleep DisturbanceFactorscore(lowinsomniasubgroup:fluoxetine,-0.6, tl.5; sertraline,-0.7, t 1.6; and psroxetine;-0.7, t 1.8; P=O.996and high insomnia:fhroxetine,-3.1, f2.O; sertraline,-3.3, *1.8; and paroxetine; -2.9, f2.4; p= O.705). Treatmentswerewelltoleratedbypatientsin both low andhighbaselineinsomniasubgroups.

Safety of solanezumab in the expedition-ext study up to 2 years in a mild to moderate Alzheimer’s disease population

experienced at least one AE. All AEs were of mild to moderate intensity and resolved before the end of the study. Thirteen subjects (20%) experienced treatment-related AEs. The most frequent treatment-related AE was headache, reported by 7 subjects of which 5 were treated with BI 1181181. There was no clear dose–response relationship for any of the AEs. There was no effect of BI 1181181 on vital signs, ECGs, or clinical laboratory parameters. BI1181181 pharmacokinetics were characterized by dose-proportional increases in Cmax and AUCinf, median time of maximum concentrations of 0.5-1.5 h, and geometric mean half-life of 15.7-18.6 h. The pharmacokinetics of BI 1181181 was not affected by food intake. Ab1-40 plasma concentrations dropped rapidly following administration of BI 1181181. The effect was dose-dependent. In all dose groups mean Ab1-40 concentrations remained below baseline values for at least 96h. Conclusions:Single doses of BI1181181 (2-200 mg) were well tolerated and showed dose-dependent plasma pharmacodynamics. Plasma pharmacokinetics were dose-proportional, not affected by food, and are compatible with once-a-day dosing.