Virginia K. Sutton

Olanzapine in the treatment of dopamimetic-induced psychosis in patients with Parkinson's Disease

BACKGROUND Studies in elderly patients demonstrate antipsychotic efficacy and favorable safety profiles for olanzapine. We report results from two placebo-controlled, double-blind studies of olanzapine for treatment of dopamimetic drug-induced psychosis in patients with Parkinsons disease (PD). METHODS Patients were treated with olanzapine or placebo for 4 weeks while dopamimetic therapy was held constant. Olanzapine was initiated at 2.5 mg/day, with 2.5-mg/day increases allowed every 3 to 4 days up to the maximum dose of 15 mg/day. RESULTS Olanzapine patients showed significant improvements from baseline on positive symptoms and most efficacy measures, but no significant treatment-group differences were observed. Olanzapine performed significantly worse than placebo in both studies on the Unified Parkinsons Disease Rating Scale (UPDRS) total, Motor, and Activities of Daily Living scales, but not the UPDRS Tremor item or Complications scores. Corrected QT interval, vital signs, and body weight were not significantly different from placebo. CONCLUSIONS These findings did not demonstrate superior efficacy of olanzapine for treatment of dopamimetic-induced psychosis in PD. The initial dose-titration schedule and mild baseline levels of psychosis may account for these findings. Future studies involving gradual dose titration are needed to explore further olanzapines optimum use for patients with PD with treatment-related psychosis.

Variation in Catechol-O-Methyltransferase Is Associated with Duloxetine Response in a Clinical Trial for Major Depressive Disorder

BACKGROUND The study objective was to evaluate variations in genes implicated in antidepressant mechanism of action for association with response to duloxetine treatment in major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS We assessed response over 6 weeks in 250 duloxetine-treated Caucasian patients in a randomized, double-blind study of patients with MDD. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in 19 candidate genes selected based on evidence for involvement in antidepressant mechanism of action. Primary analysis examined baseline to end point reduction in the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD17) total score, using a set-based test for association for each gene. Follow-up analyses examined individual SNPs within any significant gene for association with reduction in HAMD17 and 30-item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician Rated (IDS-C-30). RESULTS After correction for multiple comparisons, only COMT was associated with change in HAMD17 (experiment wide p = .018). Peak association was detected with rs165599 (p = .006), which accounted for approximately 3% of variance in HAMD17 change and >4% of variance in IDS-C-30 change (p = .001). The least-squared mean change (SE) in HAMD17 score by rs165599 genotype was -10.8 (1.2), -8.7 (.6), and -6.5 (.7) for patients with GG, GA, and AA genotypes, respectively. For SNPs in serotonin 2A receptor (HTR2A) previously associated with citalopram response, including rs7997012, no significant evidence of association with duloxetine response was identified. CONCLUSIONS Single nucleotide polymorphisms in COMT were associated with symptom change in duloxetine-treated patients with MDD. If replicated, the magnitude of the COMT genotype effect is of clinical relevance.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of olanzapine in the prevention of psychotic relapse

Sustained response to antipsychotic therapy is an important outcome measure for patients with psychotic disorders. Placebo control in studies of relapse prevention contributes valuable information yet provokes much debate. This study, using placebo as a control, evaluated olanzapine’s efficacy in preventing a psychotic relapse. Participants were stable minimally symptomatic outpatients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The study included 4 phases: (1) 4-day to 9-day screening/evaluation (N = 583), (2) 6-week conversion to open-label olanzapine (N = 493; 10-20 mg/d), (3) 8-week stabilization on olanzapine (N = 458; 10-20 mg/d), and (4) 52-week randomized (2:1), double-blind maintenance with olanzapine (N = 224; 10–20 mg/d) or placebo (N = 102). Primary relapse criteria were clinically significant changes in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) positive item cluster or rehospitalization due to positive symptoms. Statistical methodology allowed sequential real-time estimation of efficacy across blinded treatment groups and multiple interim analyses, which permitted study termination when efficacy was significantly different between treatments. A significant between-treatment difference emerged 210 days after first patient randomization to double-blind treatment. Thus, 151 (46.3%) of the randomized patients were discontinued early and 34 (10.4%) of the planned patient enrollment were not required. The olanzapine group had a significantly longer time to relapse (P < 0.0001) than the placebo group. The 6-month cumulative estimated relapse rate (Kaplan-Meier) was 5.5% for olanzapine-treated patients versus 55.2% for placebo-treated patients. The design of this study enabled appropriate statistical testing of the primary hypothesis while minimizing exposure of patients to a less effective treatment than olanzapine. In remitted stabilized patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder, olanzapine demonstrated a positive benefit-to-risk profile in relapse prevention.

Quality of life assessment in adult patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder treated with atomoxetine

Background: Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) has its onset during childhood and is estimated to affect 3% to 7% of school-aged children. Unfortunately, the disorder frequently persists into adult life. The burden of this disorder is considerable and is often characterized by academic (or occupational) impairment and dysfunction within the family and society. Despite the existence of research demonstrating the effects of ADHD on certain aspects of life, the clinical trials of treatments for this disorder have focused primarily on efficacy and safety. Methods: Atomoxetine was approved in the United States in November 2002 for the treatment of ADHD in children, adolescents, and adults. The present study uses data from a clinical trial of atomoxetine in adult patients with ADHD that incorporated a measure of health-related quality of life (the Medical Outcomes Study 36-item short-form health survey [SF-36]) as part of the overall assessment of the success of this relatively new treatment. The primary outcome measure for ADHD symptoms was the Conners Adult ADHD Rating Scale-Investigator Rated: Screening Version (CAARS) ADHD total symptom score. Results: In agreement with previous studies, adult patients with ADHD treated with atomoxetine at typical doses showed significant amelioration of ADHD symptoms, as measured on the CAARS. At baseline, the measures of overall mental health (one aspect of quality of life) of adult patients with ADHD were below the average level, as measured on the SF-36. Treatment with atomoxetine significantly improved the measures of mental health and ameliorated the ADHD symptoms. In addition, the 2 measures were correlated. Conclusions: These data suggest that pharmacological intervention with atomoxetine not only ameliorates ADHD symptoms in adult patients but also improves their perceived quality of life.

Clinical Responses to Atomoxetine in Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: The Integrated Data Exploratory Analysis (IDEA) Study.

OBJECTIVE Clinical experience suggests that some (but not all) patients with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are highly responsive to the nonstimulant atomoxetine. We conducted a retrospective analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to identify potential baseline (moderator) and on-treatment (mediator) predictors of responses. METHOD Data from 6 U.S. RCTs among patients aged 6 to 18 years were pooled (N = 1,069; subjects treated with atomoxetine, n = 618). Subjects were categorized as much improved (> or = 40% decrease in ADHD Rating Scale-IV-Parent Version: Investigator Administered and Scored total score), minimally improved (25%-< 40% decline), or nonresponders (< 25% decrease). Logistic regression, analyses of variance, and repeated-measures analyses were used to explore associations between baseline and on-treatment variables, achieving a much improved response at trial endpoint (6-9 weeks). RESULTS Forty-seven percent of patients showed a much improved clinical response, and 40% did not respond. Only 13% of the patients had a minimal response. No baseline characteristics predicted achieving a much improved clinical response; the only predictor of achieving this response was being at least minimally improved by treatment week 4 (sensitivity = 81%, specificity = 72%, positive predictive value = 75%, and negative predictive value = 79%). CONCLUSIONS Clinical response to atomoxetine was bimodal, with most subjects being either responders who were much improved or nonresponders. There were no demographic or clinical predictors of response. However, subjects who ultimately achieved a much improved response were likely to be at least minimal responders by week 4. The recommendation to consider either augmenting or switching treatment in patients who do not achieve at least this level of response to atomoxetine by 4 weeks offers a method for limiting the extended duration of titration to subjects who are most likely to benefit further, while minimizing the duration of exposure in those less likely to achieve an excellent response.

Once-Daily Atomoxetine for Treating Pediatric Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Comparison of Morning and Evening Dosing

In this 3-arm, randomized, double-blind trial, once-daily morning-dosed atomoxetine, evening-dosed atomoxetine, and placebo were compared for treating pediatric attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Patients received morning atomoxetine/evening placebo (n = 102), morning placebo/evening atomoxetine (n = 93), or morning placebo/evening placebo (n = 93) for about 6 weeks. Core symptom efficacy was measured at weeks 0, 1, 3, and 6. Parent assessments of the child’s home behaviors in the evening and early morning were collected daily during the first 2 weeks of treatment. Morning-dosed and evening-dosed atomoxetine significantly decreased core ADHD symptoms relative to placebo and produced symptom improvements that were measured up to 24 hours later. Morning dosing was superior to evening dosing on some efficacy measures. Evening dosing showed greater tolerability with significantly more patients receiving morning atomoxetine reporting at least 1 adverse event than those receiving evening atomoxetine.

Genetic association study of treatment response with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination or lamotrigine in bipolar I depression

OBJECTIVE To evaluate common genetic variations for association with symptomatic improvement in bipolar I depression following treatment with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC) or lamotrigine. METHOD Symptom improvement was assessed in 88 OFC-treated and 85 lamotrigine-treated white patients with bipolar I depression in the 7-week acute period of a randomized, double-blind study comparing OFC (6/25, 6/50, 12/25, or 12/50 mg/d [olanzapine/fluoxetine]) with lamotrigine (titrated to 200 mg/d). The original study was conducted from November 2003 to August 2004. Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) were genotyped in a set of 19 candidate genes corresponding to known sites of activity for olanzapine and fluoxetine or previously associated with antidepressant or antipsychotic response. Primary outcome was the reduction in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score as assessed by the difference by genotype from baseline to week 7 from a mixed-effects repeated measures analysis with terms for visit, genotype, genotype-by-visit interaction, and baseline MADRS score as a covariate. RESULTS SNPs within the dopamine D(3) receptor and histamine H(1) receptor (HRH1) genes were significantly associated with response to OFC. SNPs within the dopamine D(2) receptor, HRH1, dopamine beta-hydroxylase, glucocorticoid receptor, and melanocortin 2 receptor genes were significantly associated with response to lamotrigine. CONCLUSIONS SNPs in specific candidate genes were associated with symptomatic improvement in a treatment-specific fashion. These results suggest the importance of dopaminergic effects in the treatment of patients with bipolar I depression and the potential utility of genotyping in selection of pharmacologic treatments for bipolar depression.

Olanzapine in the treatment of anxiety symptoms due to Alzheimer's disease: a post hoc analysis

Alzheimers disease (AD) is associated with both cognitive and behavioral symptoms. Agitation, hallucinations, delusions, aggression, irritability, and anxiety are observed in up to 90% of patients with dementia. Although new information has emerged in recent years on the treatment of psychosis and agitation in dementia, very little information is available about the treatment of anxiety symptoms in this population.

The Life Participation Scale for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder–Child Version: Psychometric Properties of an Adaptive Change Instrument

INTRODUCTION The Life Participation Scale for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)-Child Version (LPS-C) was developed to capture treatment-related improvements in adaptive functioning, including quality of life, social development, and emotion regulation, that may be missed by scales that assess only the 18 ADHD symptoms in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV). The 24-item LPS-C is intended to augment traditional ADHD measures. This analysis assessed the scales psychometric properties. METHODS The LPS-C was completed by the investigators while questioning the parents of 979 children in three placebo-controlled clinical trials that measured the effects of atomoxetine for treating ADHD. In addition to a factor analysis, assessments of responsiveness; internal consistency; item-to-total correlations; and convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity were completed. RESULTS The LPS-C showed evidence of internal consistency and convergent, divergent, and discriminant validity. The factor analysis suggested two subscales (labeled the Self-Control and Agreeable subscales). The LPS-C demonstrated responsiveness in two of the three trials. The effect sizes suggest responsiveness between that for psychosocial measures and core symptom measures. CONCLUSIONS The LPS-C appears to be a valid research and clinical instrument for assessing change in ADHD-related adaptive functioning that may not be captured by traditional measures of core ADHD symptoms.

P4-100: Statin use and the risk of Alzheimer's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: Insights from a health insurance database

Background: The cholesterol-lowering statins are among the most commonly prescribed drugs in the US. A causative role for cholesterol metabolism has been suggested in the development of Alzheimer’s disease (AD), and epidemiologic studies have suggested that statins reduce the risk of AD. Conversely, treatment with statins, has been reported to be associated with an increased risk of developing amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS). We examined de-identified claims data from a large US health insurer to quantify the association between statin use and the development of AD or ALS. Methods: Study 1. Plan members (minimum 2 years participation) ages 55 with a new diagnosis of AD between May 2002 and Nov 2007 were identified (N 24,259). For each of these AD patients, a corresponding age-, calendar time-, and sex-matched risk set (with a similar minimum 2 years preceding enrollment) was also identified. Conditional logistic regression was utilized to assess the prevalence of statin use (during the 2 years preceding ascertainment) among AD patients relative to the matched risk set. Study 2. Plan members (minimum 2 years participation) ages 40 with a new diagnosis of ALS between Jan 1996 and Aug 2007 were identified (N 1011). For each patient, a single age-, calendar time-, and sex-matched control was identified (with a similar minimum 2 years preceding enrollment). A matched analysis provided a summary (Mantel-Haenszel) association between statin use and ALS. Results: Study 1. Results suggested a slightly lower risk of AD associated with statin use that was statistically significant, but was not considered clinically meaningful (summary odds ratio 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99; P .0003). Study 2. Contrary to previous reports, results indicated there was not an increased risk of ALS associated with statin use (summary odds ratio 0.91; 95% CI 0.72-1.16; P .4619). Conclusions: The present results indicate that prior statin use is statistically associated with a decreased risk for AD, but the effect is of questionable clinical relevance. There appeared to be no change in risk of ALS associated with statin use. The potential neuroprotective and/or deleterious effects of statin use in these disorders is modified by several factors including duration of use as well as concomitant illnesses and medications.