Shuyu Zhang

Duloxetine Versus Placebo in Patients With Chronic Low Back Pain: A 12-Week, Fixed-Dose, Randomized, Double-Blind Trial

UNLABELLED This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed efficacy and safety of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain (CLBP). Adults (n = 401) with a nonneuropathic CLBP and average pain intensity of ≥ 4 on an 11-point numerical scale (Brief Pain Inventory [BPI]) were treated with either duloxetine 60 mg once daily or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary measure was BPI average pain. Secondary endpoints included Patients Global Impressions of Improvement (PGI-I), Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ-24), BPI-Severity (BPI-S), BPI-Interference (BPI-I), and response rates (either ≥ 30% or ≥ 50% BPI average pain reduction at endpoint). Health outcomes included Short Form-36, European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions, and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment questionnaire. Safety and tolerability were assessed. Compared with placebo-treated patients, duloxetine-treated patients reported a significantly greater reduction in BPI average pain (P ≤ .001). Similarly, duloxetine-treated patients reported significantly greater improvements in PGI-I, BPI-S, BPI-I, 50% response rates, and some health outcomes. The RMDQ and 30% response rate showed numerical improvements with duloxetine treatment. Significantly more patients in the duloxetine group (15.2%) than patients in the placebo group (5.4%) discontinued because of adverse events (P = .002). Nausea and dry mouth were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events with rates significantly higher in duloxetine-treated patients. PERSPECTIVE This study provides clinical evidence of the efficacy and safety of duloxetine at a fixed dose of 60 mg once daily in the treatment of chronic low back pain (CLBP). As of December 2009, duloxetine has not received regulatory approval for the treatment of CLBP.

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.

A Randomized, Double-Blind Study of Continuation Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder After 1 Year

BACKGROUND The efficacy of atomoxetine in maintaining symptom response following 1 year of treatment was assessed in children and adolescents (n = 163) with DSM-IV defined attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS Subjects had previously responded to atomoxetine acutely and had completed 1 year of double-blind atomoxetine treatment. They were then randomly assigned in double-blind fashion to continued atomoxetine or placebo substitution for 6 months. RESULTS Atomoxetine was superior to placebo in preventing relapse (Wilcoxon test, p = .008) and in maintaining symptom response (ADHD Rating Scale IV score, p < .001). Among subjects assigned to discontinuation, the magnitude of symptom return was generally to a level of severity less than that observed at study entry. CONCLUSIONS Following 1 year of treatment with atomoxetine, continued treatment over the ensuing 6 months was associated with superior outcomes compared with placebo substitution. However, there was considerable variability between individuals in the magnitude of symptom return after drug discontinuation, suggesting that some subjects treated with atomoxetine for a year with good results may consolidate gains made during drug treatment and could benefit from a medication-free trial to assess the need for ongoing drug treatment.

Comorbid oppositional defiant disorder and the risk of relapse during 9 months of atomoxetine treatment for attention- deficit/hyperactivity disorder

ObjectiveTo examine the influence of comorbid oppositional defiant disorder (ODD) on the relative risk (RR) of relapse during 9 months of treatment with atomoxetine for attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).MethodFour hundred and sixteen children and adolescents with ADHD whose symptoms remitted during initial 10-week, open-label atomoxetine treatment were randomly assigned to continue with atomoxetine or placebo.ResultsIn all, 43% met criteria for comorbid ODD. A total of 17% of patients with comorbid ODD relapsed (CGI-Severity score ≥ 3 and ADHD Rating Scale total score of 90% or more of baseline at study entry on two consecutive visits) during atomoxetine treatment, compared with 26% of patients without comorbid ODD (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42–1.06). Mean time to relapse was not significantly different [mean (SE) days to relapse, ADHD/ +ODD: 215 (7.38); ADHD/–ODD: 211 (7.61); log rank p=0.08]. This finding is placed within the context of atomoxetine affording an overall protection against relapse compared with placebo (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.43–0.80).ConclusionsComorbid ODD does not influence the rate of relapse of patients with ADHD during longer-term treatment with atomoxetine. Atomoxetine protects against the relapse of ADHD symptoms regardless of the presence or absence of comorbid ODD.

A prospective, multicenter, open-label assessment of atomoxetine in non-North American children and adolescents with ADHD.

Abstract.Objective:The aim of this study was to study treatment response to atomoxetine in a large, multicenter study of non-North American patients with ADHD.Methods:A total of 604 children and adolescents with ADHD were enrolled in a 10-week open-label trial with atomoxetine prior to randomization to a double-blind relapse prevention phase at 33 sites in the United Kingdom, continental Europe, Israel, South Africa, and Australia. All patients had ADHD symptom severity at least 1.5 standard deviations above United States age and gender norms for their diagnostic subtype as measured by the investigator-scored ADHD Rating Scale (ADHD RS). Outcomes were assessed by analysis of change in the ADHD RS; functional and psychosocial outcomes were assessed using the Child Health Questionnaire (CHQ).Results:At endpoint, ADHD RS total scores decreased by an average of 56.7%, and 69% of patients were rated as having no or minimal symptoms. Significant improvement was observed in psychosocial and functional outcomes. Discontinuations attributed to adverse events were < 4%.Conclusion:These open-label data, gathered in an international setting, add to our knowledge of the value of atomoxetine in treating ADHD symptoms, as well as its safety and tolerability.

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.

Safety and Tolerability of Atomoxetine Over 3 to 4 Years in Children and Adolescents With ADHD

OBJECTIVE To assess the long-term safety and tolerability of atomoxetine hydrochloride in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated for > or = 3 years. METHOD Data from 13 double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and 3 open-label extension studies were pooled. Outcome measures were patient-reported treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs); discontinuations due to AEs, serious AEs, and changes in body weight, height, vital signs, electrocardiogram, and hepatic function tests. RESULTS In total, 714 patients were treated with atomoxetine for > or = 3 years (mean follow-up 4.8 years [SD 1.1 years]), including a subset of 508 treated for > or = 4 years (mean follow-up 5.3 years [SD 0.8 years]). Most subjects were younger than 12 years at entry (73.8%), male (78.4%), and white (88.9%). The mean final daily dose of atomoxetine was 1.35 mg/kg (SD 0.37 mg/kg). No new or unexpected AEs were observed compared with acute-phase treatment. Less than 6% of patients exhibited aggressive/hostile behaviors, and less than 1.6% reported suicidal ideation/behavior. No clinically significant effects were seen on growth rate, vital signs, or electrocardiographic parameters, and < or = 2% of patients showed potentially clinically significant hepatic changes. CONCLUSION Atomoxetine was safe and well tolerated for children and adolescents with > or = 3 and/or > or = 4 years of treatment.

Hepatic Events Associated with Atomoxetine Treatment for Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder

AbstractObjective: 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.

Treatment Approaches to Major Depressive Disorder Relapse

Objective: Although continuing antidepressant treatment after patients have responded to medication has been shown to greatly reduce the risk of relapse, this risk is not eliminated. A number of theories have been proposed to account for this apparent loss of efficacy. A common initial approach to managing relapse is to increase the dose of antidepressant. We prospectively evaluated the likelihood of response to increasing the fluoxetine doses in patients relapsing during a long-term efficacy study of two fluoxetine dosing regimens. Method: Patients meeting the DSM-IV criteria for major depressive disorder with modified HAMD17 scores ≧18 and CGI-severity scores ≧4 were treated for 13 weeks with open-label 20 mg/day fluoxetine in a multicenter US study. Responders (n = 501) were randomized to 20 mg fluoxetine daily, placebo, or 90 mg enteric-coated fluoxetine weekly for 25 weeks of double-blind continuation treatment. If the patients relapsed during the continuation phase, they were offered a 25-week optional rescue treatment phase during which the study medication dose was increased as follows: (1) patients on placebo had treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg/day reinitiated, (2) patients on fluoxetine 20 mg/day had their dose increased to 40 mg/day, and (3) patients on a 90-mg weekly dose had their dose increased to 90 mg twice a week. The results of the rescue phase for the latter two groups who relapsed while on continuation treatment with fluoxetine are reported. Response was defined as a 50% reduction in the modified HAMD17 score since time of relapse and a CGI-severity score ≤2. Additional efficacy analyses included HAMD and CGI-severity changes from baseline to endpoint. Safety measures included assessment of treatment-emergent adverse events, vital signs, and laboratory measures. Results: Overall, patients relapsing during the continuation treatment responded to an increased dose (57% of the 40-mg-daily group and 72% of the enteric-coated 90-mg-twice-weekly group). Mean modified HAMD17 scores decreased from a mean of approximately 20 to below 8 and were maintained for up to 6 months in the responders. Thirty-five percent of patients either did not respond or initially responded but again relapsed after augmentation of medication. Conclusions: The patients relapsing after initially responding to fluoxetine can benefit from an increase in fluoxetine dose. These results also generally support increasing dose as a first-line treatment strategy for a patient who has relapsed while taking a previously effective dose of an antidepressant. Increasing enteric-coated fluoxetine 90 mg once weekly to twice weekly appeared to be as well-tolerated and effective in restoring response as increasing a daily fluoxetine dose from 20 to 40 mg.

Maintenance of effect of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain: a 41-week uncontrolled, dose-blinded study.

OBJECTIVE To assess the maintenance of the effect of duloxetine in the treatment of chronic low back pain. METHODS Patients (N = 181) with chronic low back pain entered a 41-week extension phase after completing a 13-week placebo-controlled treatment phase. The maintenance of the effect was assessed in patients taking duloxetine 60/120 mg/day who met the response criteria (> or = 30% reduction in Brief Pain Inventory average pain) at the end of the placebo-controlled phase. In addition, physical function was evaluated using the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire, the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness, and the Brief Pain Inventory Pain Severity and Interference ratings. Quality of life, safety, and tolerability outcomes were also assessed. Finally, placebo-treated patients were switched to duloxetine 60 mg/day at the beginning of the extension phase and their response to treatment is also reported. RESULTS Initial responders to duloxetine treatment demonstrated further significant improvement (within-group) in pain, physical function, and quality of life. Significant within-group improvements were also observed in the extension phase for placebo-treated patients who were switched to duloxetine. Duloxetine was well tolerated with no new safety findings reported. CONCLUSIONS In this study, the analgesic effect of duloxetine in patients with chronic low back pain was not only maintained for 41 weeks, but additional statistically significant improvement in pain and function was observed.