User login
New themes emerging about antipsychotic maintenance therapy
COPENHAGEN – Recent studies emphasize the long-term merits of extending antipsychotic therapy beyond 1 year for patients in remission after a first psychotic episode, Mark Weiser, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Another emerging theme in the research literature, albeit a somewhat heretical one, is the value of antipsychotic polypharmacy, added Dr. Weiser, professor and chairman of the department of psychiatry at Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
“Polypharmacy might not be so bad,” he declared in a keynote lecture in which he highlighted recent major publications addressing issues involving pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia.
“When we were residents, we were all taught that it’s not good to give two antipsychotics together, that all antipsychotics work only through dopamine D2 [receptor] blockade, hence there’s no point in giving more than one antipsychotic because all you’re doing is increasing side effects. But maybe it’s not as simple as that,” the psychiatrist said.
Exhibit 1: A recent Finnish national registry study of 62,250 patients with schizophrenia featuring up to 20-year follow-up showing that any antipsychotic polypharmacy was associated with a significantly lower risk of rehospitalization, compared with any antipsychotic monotherapy. The combination that stood out as having the lowest rehospitalization risk was clozapine plus aripiprazole, with a 14%-23% lower risk than for clozapine alone, which was the most effective monotherapy (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 May; 76[5]:499-507).
Dr. Weiser pronounced himself a firm believer in the Finnish experience.
“The reason I think that this is true is that it’s exactly what I find in my own VA data,” he said.
Indeed, he and his coinvestigators are preparing to publish the results of their longitudinal study of 37,368 schizophrenia patients in the U.S. Veterans Affairs system. A key finding was that patients on antipsychotic polypharmacy had a longer time to treatment discontinuation than did those on monotherapy.
“Polypharmacy, at least in real-world study designs, seems to be good,” he noted.
Moreover, even in the world of highly selective randomized clinical trials, polypharmacy appears to fare pretty well as a treatment strategy, Dr. Weiser noted. A recent meta-analysis of six RCTs totaling 341 patients showed that switching patients from two antipsychotics to one was associated with a 2.2-fold increased risk of study discontinuation, although the investigators rated the quality of the trials as low to very low (Schizophr Res. 2019 Jul;209:50-7).
“I’m doing more polypharmacy now because of these data,” Dr. Weiser said. “My understanding of the polypharmacy data is that it’s not just blocking dopamine that’s important for treatment efficacy in schizophrenia.”
Getting a handle on first-episode psychosis
Dr. Weiser was a coinvestigator in the European Commission–funded OPTiMiSE study, in which 446 patients with first-episode schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder in 14 European countries and Israel received 4 weeks of oral amisulpride. Then, if they were not in symptomatic remission, they were randomized double-blind to 6 weeks more of amisulpride or a switch to olanzapine. Those who weren’t in remission at 10 weeks were then placed on 12 weeks of open-label clozapine.
OPTiMiSE validated the clinical utility of a simple treatment algorithm, as 56% of patients achieved remission using stringent criteria by week 4 on amisulpride, and an additional 7% reached that endpoint by week 10, with the switch to olanzapine offering no added value over continued amisulpride. Switching week-10 nonresponders to clozapine enabled 28% of them to achieve remission (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Oct 1;5[10]:797-807).
A key take-home message of the trial, Dr. Weiser said, is that a switch to clozapine is justified after 10 weeks of unsuccessful treatment with a first-line antipsychotic; there’s no need to wait until patients have failed on two consecutive antipsychotics, as guidelines now recommend.
He observed that it can be a lot more challenging to keep patients in remission after a first psychotic episode than it is to get them to respond in the first place. For this reason, he found particularly instructive a recent study by psychiatrists at the University of Hong Kong that shined a light on the understudied long-term adverse consequences of stopping antipsychotic therapy after 1 year in patients successfully treated for a first-episode psychosis. At the 1-year point in this randomized trial, the successfully remitted patients were given maintenance therapy or their antipsychotic therapy was discontinued for 12 months. Ten years later, the investigators reported, the rate of a composite endpoint comprising persistent psychotic symptoms, requirement for clozapine, or completed suicide was 21% in the maintenance therapy group and significantly worse at 39% in those who had stopped treatment at 1 year (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 May 1;5[5]:432-42).
“It’s probably a good idea to keep patients who are stable on maintenance therapy for longer than a year. A lot of first-episode patients don’t want to hear this. A lot of family members don’t want to hear this. And a lot of patients, of course, decide for themselves and stop treatment, although I tell them they should not.
Asked how low his low-dose long-term maintenance therapy is, he replied: “Negotiate with your patient about the lowest dose he or she is willing to take. In my opinion, 1 mg of risperidone is a lot better than 0 mg of risperidone, although that’s not an opinion supported by data.”
Dr. Weiser reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
COPENHAGEN – Recent studies emphasize the long-term merits of extending antipsychotic therapy beyond 1 year for patients in remission after a first psychotic episode, Mark Weiser, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Another emerging theme in the research literature, albeit a somewhat heretical one, is the value of antipsychotic polypharmacy, added Dr. Weiser, professor and chairman of the department of psychiatry at Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
“Polypharmacy might not be so bad,” he declared in a keynote lecture in which he highlighted recent major publications addressing issues involving pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia.
“When we were residents, we were all taught that it’s not good to give two antipsychotics together, that all antipsychotics work only through dopamine D2 [receptor] blockade, hence there’s no point in giving more than one antipsychotic because all you’re doing is increasing side effects. But maybe it’s not as simple as that,” the psychiatrist said.
Exhibit 1: A recent Finnish national registry study of 62,250 patients with schizophrenia featuring up to 20-year follow-up showing that any antipsychotic polypharmacy was associated with a significantly lower risk of rehospitalization, compared with any antipsychotic monotherapy. The combination that stood out as having the lowest rehospitalization risk was clozapine plus aripiprazole, with a 14%-23% lower risk than for clozapine alone, which was the most effective monotherapy (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 May; 76[5]:499-507).
Dr. Weiser pronounced himself a firm believer in the Finnish experience.
“The reason I think that this is true is that it’s exactly what I find in my own VA data,” he said.
Indeed, he and his coinvestigators are preparing to publish the results of their longitudinal study of 37,368 schizophrenia patients in the U.S. Veterans Affairs system. A key finding was that patients on antipsychotic polypharmacy had a longer time to treatment discontinuation than did those on monotherapy.
“Polypharmacy, at least in real-world study designs, seems to be good,” he noted.
Moreover, even in the world of highly selective randomized clinical trials, polypharmacy appears to fare pretty well as a treatment strategy, Dr. Weiser noted. A recent meta-analysis of six RCTs totaling 341 patients showed that switching patients from two antipsychotics to one was associated with a 2.2-fold increased risk of study discontinuation, although the investigators rated the quality of the trials as low to very low (Schizophr Res. 2019 Jul;209:50-7).
“I’m doing more polypharmacy now because of these data,” Dr. Weiser said. “My understanding of the polypharmacy data is that it’s not just blocking dopamine that’s important for treatment efficacy in schizophrenia.”
Getting a handle on first-episode psychosis
Dr. Weiser was a coinvestigator in the European Commission–funded OPTiMiSE study, in which 446 patients with first-episode schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder in 14 European countries and Israel received 4 weeks of oral amisulpride. Then, if they were not in symptomatic remission, they were randomized double-blind to 6 weeks more of amisulpride or a switch to olanzapine. Those who weren’t in remission at 10 weeks were then placed on 12 weeks of open-label clozapine.
OPTiMiSE validated the clinical utility of a simple treatment algorithm, as 56% of patients achieved remission using stringent criteria by week 4 on amisulpride, and an additional 7% reached that endpoint by week 10, with the switch to olanzapine offering no added value over continued amisulpride. Switching week-10 nonresponders to clozapine enabled 28% of them to achieve remission (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Oct 1;5[10]:797-807).
A key take-home message of the trial, Dr. Weiser said, is that a switch to clozapine is justified after 10 weeks of unsuccessful treatment with a first-line antipsychotic; there’s no need to wait until patients have failed on two consecutive antipsychotics, as guidelines now recommend.
He observed that it can be a lot more challenging to keep patients in remission after a first psychotic episode than it is to get them to respond in the first place. For this reason, he found particularly instructive a recent study by psychiatrists at the University of Hong Kong that shined a light on the understudied long-term adverse consequences of stopping antipsychotic therapy after 1 year in patients successfully treated for a first-episode psychosis. At the 1-year point in this randomized trial, the successfully remitted patients were given maintenance therapy or their antipsychotic therapy was discontinued for 12 months. Ten years later, the investigators reported, the rate of a composite endpoint comprising persistent psychotic symptoms, requirement for clozapine, or completed suicide was 21% in the maintenance therapy group and significantly worse at 39% in those who had stopped treatment at 1 year (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 May 1;5[5]:432-42).
“It’s probably a good idea to keep patients who are stable on maintenance therapy for longer than a year. A lot of first-episode patients don’t want to hear this. A lot of family members don’t want to hear this. And a lot of patients, of course, decide for themselves and stop treatment, although I tell them they should not.
Asked how low his low-dose long-term maintenance therapy is, he replied: “Negotiate with your patient about the lowest dose he or she is willing to take. In my opinion, 1 mg of risperidone is a lot better than 0 mg of risperidone, although that’s not an opinion supported by data.”
Dr. Weiser reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
COPENHAGEN – Recent studies emphasize the long-term merits of extending antipsychotic therapy beyond 1 year for patients in remission after a first psychotic episode, Mark Weiser, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Another emerging theme in the research literature, albeit a somewhat heretical one, is the value of antipsychotic polypharmacy, added Dr. Weiser, professor and chairman of the department of psychiatry at Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University.
“Polypharmacy might not be so bad,” he declared in a keynote lecture in which he highlighted recent major publications addressing issues involving pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia.
“When we were residents, we were all taught that it’s not good to give two antipsychotics together, that all antipsychotics work only through dopamine D2 [receptor] blockade, hence there’s no point in giving more than one antipsychotic because all you’re doing is increasing side effects. But maybe it’s not as simple as that,” the psychiatrist said.
Exhibit 1: A recent Finnish national registry study of 62,250 patients with schizophrenia featuring up to 20-year follow-up showing that any antipsychotic polypharmacy was associated with a significantly lower risk of rehospitalization, compared with any antipsychotic monotherapy. The combination that stood out as having the lowest rehospitalization risk was clozapine plus aripiprazole, with a 14%-23% lower risk than for clozapine alone, which was the most effective monotherapy (JAMA Psychiatry. 2019 May; 76[5]:499-507).
Dr. Weiser pronounced himself a firm believer in the Finnish experience.
“The reason I think that this is true is that it’s exactly what I find in my own VA data,” he said.
Indeed, he and his coinvestigators are preparing to publish the results of their longitudinal study of 37,368 schizophrenia patients in the U.S. Veterans Affairs system. A key finding was that patients on antipsychotic polypharmacy had a longer time to treatment discontinuation than did those on monotherapy.
“Polypharmacy, at least in real-world study designs, seems to be good,” he noted.
Moreover, even in the world of highly selective randomized clinical trials, polypharmacy appears to fare pretty well as a treatment strategy, Dr. Weiser noted. A recent meta-analysis of six RCTs totaling 341 patients showed that switching patients from two antipsychotics to one was associated with a 2.2-fold increased risk of study discontinuation, although the investigators rated the quality of the trials as low to very low (Schizophr Res. 2019 Jul;209:50-7).
“I’m doing more polypharmacy now because of these data,” Dr. Weiser said. “My understanding of the polypharmacy data is that it’s not just blocking dopamine that’s important for treatment efficacy in schizophrenia.”
Getting a handle on first-episode psychosis
Dr. Weiser was a coinvestigator in the European Commission–funded OPTiMiSE study, in which 446 patients with first-episode schizophrenia or schizophreniform disorder in 14 European countries and Israel received 4 weeks of oral amisulpride. Then, if they were not in symptomatic remission, they were randomized double-blind to 6 weeks more of amisulpride or a switch to olanzapine. Those who weren’t in remission at 10 weeks were then placed on 12 weeks of open-label clozapine.
OPTiMiSE validated the clinical utility of a simple treatment algorithm, as 56% of patients achieved remission using stringent criteria by week 4 on amisulpride, and an additional 7% reached that endpoint by week 10, with the switch to olanzapine offering no added value over continued amisulpride. Switching week-10 nonresponders to clozapine enabled 28% of them to achieve remission (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Oct 1;5[10]:797-807).
A key take-home message of the trial, Dr. Weiser said, is that a switch to clozapine is justified after 10 weeks of unsuccessful treatment with a first-line antipsychotic; there’s no need to wait until patients have failed on two consecutive antipsychotics, as guidelines now recommend.
He observed that it can be a lot more challenging to keep patients in remission after a first psychotic episode than it is to get them to respond in the first place. For this reason, he found particularly instructive a recent study by psychiatrists at the University of Hong Kong that shined a light on the understudied long-term adverse consequences of stopping antipsychotic therapy after 1 year in patients successfully treated for a first-episode psychosis. At the 1-year point in this randomized trial, the successfully remitted patients were given maintenance therapy or their antipsychotic therapy was discontinued for 12 months. Ten years later, the investigators reported, the rate of a composite endpoint comprising persistent psychotic symptoms, requirement for clozapine, or completed suicide was 21% in the maintenance therapy group and significantly worse at 39% in those who had stopped treatment at 1 year (Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 May 1;5[5]:432-42).
“It’s probably a good idea to keep patients who are stable on maintenance therapy for longer than a year. A lot of first-episode patients don’t want to hear this. A lot of family members don’t want to hear this. And a lot of patients, of course, decide for themselves and stop treatment, although I tell them they should not.
Asked how low his low-dose long-term maintenance therapy is, he replied: “Negotiate with your patient about the lowest dose he or she is willing to take. In my opinion, 1 mg of risperidone is a lot better than 0 mg of risperidone, although that’s not an opinion supported by data.”
Dr. Weiser reported having no financial conflicts regarding his presentation.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Early maternal anxiety tied to adolescent hyperactivity
COPENHAGEN – Exposure to maternal somatic anxiety during pregnancy and toddlerhood increases a child’s risk of hyperactivity symptoms in adolescence, Blanca Bolea, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, the children of mothers who were anxious were not at increased risk for subsequent inattention symptoms in an analysis of 8,725 mothers and their children participating in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a prospective epidemiologic cohort study ongoing in southwest England since 1991, said Dr. Bolea, a psychiatrist at the University of Toronto.
These findings have practical implications for clinical care: “If we know that women who are anxious in the perinatal period put their children at risk for hyperactivity later on, then we can tackle their anxiety in pregnancy or toddlerhood. And that’s easy to do: You can do group [cognitive-behavioral therapy]; you can give medications, so there are things you can do to reduce that risk. That’s relevant, because we don’t know much about how to reduce levels of ADHD. We know it has a genetic component, but we can’t touch that. You cannot change your genes, so far. But environmental things, we can change. So if we can identify the mothers who are more anxious during pregnancy and toddlerhood and give them resources to reduce their anxiety, then we can potentially reduce hyperactivity later on,” she explained in an interview.
In the Avon study, maternal anxiety was serially assessed from early pregnancy up until a child’s 5th birthday.
“We looked for maternal symptoms similar to panic disorder: shortness of breath, dizziness, sweating, things like that. These are symptoms that any clinician can identify by asking the mothers, so it’s not hard to identify the mothers who could be at risk,” according to the psychiatrist.
Children in the Avon study were assessed for symptoms of inattention at age 8.5 years using the Sky Search, Sky Search Dual Test, and Opposite Worlds subtests of the Tests of Everyday Attention for Children. Hyperactivity symptoms were assessed at age 16 years via the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.
In an analysis adjusted for potentially confounding sociodemographic factors, adolescents whose mothers were rated by investigators as having moderate or high somatic anxiety during pregnancy and the toddlerhood years were at 2.1-fold increased risk of hyperactivity symptoms compared to those whose mothers had low or no anxiety, but increased maternal anxiety wasn’t associated with scores on any of the three tests of inattention.
Dr. Bolea cautioned that, while these Avon study findings document an association between early maternal anxiety and subsequent adolescent hyperactivity, that doesn’t prove causality. The findings are consistent, however, with the fetal origins hypothesis put forth by the late British epidemiologist David J. Barker, MD, PhD, which postulates that stressful fetal circumstances have profound effects later in life.
she said.
The hypothesis has been borne out in animal studies: Stress a pregnant rat, and her offspring will display hyperactivity.
Dr. Bolea reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children is funded by the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust.
COPENHAGEN – Exposure to maternal somatic anxiety during pregnancy and toddlerhood increases a child’s risk of hyperactivity symptoms in adolescence, Blanca Bolea, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, the children of mothers who were anxious were not at increased risk for subsequent inattention symptoms in an analysis of 8,725 mothers and their children participating in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a prospective epidemiologic cohort study ongoing in southwest England since 1991, said Dr. Bolea, a psychiatrist at the University of Toronto.
These findings have practical implications for clinical care: “If we know that women who are anxious in the perinatal period put their children at risk for hyperactivity later on, then we can tackle their anxiety in pregnancy or toddlerhood. And that’s easy to do: You can do group [cognitive-behavioral therapy]; you can give medications, so there are things you can do to reduce that risk. That’s relevant, because we don’t know much about how to reduce levels of ADHD. We know it has a genetic component, but we can’t touch that. You cannot change your genes, so far. But environmental things, we can change. So if we can identify the mothers who are more anxious during pregnancy and toddlerhood and give them resources to reduce their anxiety, then we can potentially reduce hyperactivity later on,” she explained in an interview.
In the Avon study, maternal anxiety was serially assessed from early pregnancy up until a child’s 5th birthday.
“We looked for maternal symptoms similar to panic disorder: shortness of breath, dizziness, sweating, things like that. These are symptoms that any clinician can identify by asking the mothers, so it’s not hard to identify the mothers who could be at risk,” according to the psychiatrist.
Children in the Avon study were assessed for symptoms of inattention at age 8.5 years using the Sky Search, Sky Search Dual Test, and Opposite Worlds subtests of the Tests of Everyday Attention for Children. Hyperactivity symptoms were assessed at age 16 years via the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.
In an analysis adjusted for potentially confounding sociodemographic factors, adolescents whose mothers were rated by investigators as having moderate or high somatic anxiety during pregnancy and the toddlerhood years were at 2.1-fold increased risk of hyperactivity symptoms compared to those whose mothers had low or no anxiety, but increased maternal anxiety wasn’t associated with scores on any of the three tests of inattention.
Dr. Bolea cautioned that, while these Avon study findings document an association between early maternal anxiety and subsequent adolescent hyperactivity, that doesn’t prove causality. The findings are consistent, however, with the fetal origins hypothesis put forth by the late British epidemiologist David J. Barker, MD, PhD, which postulates that stressful fetal circumstances have profound effects later in life.
she said.
The hypothesis has been borne out in animal studies: Stress a pregnant rat, and her offspring will display hyperactivity.
Dr. Bolea reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children is funded by the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust.
COPENHAGEN – Exposure to maternal somatic anxiety during pregnancy and toddlerhood increases a child’s risk of hyperactivity symptoms in adolescence, Blanca Bolea, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
In contrast, the children of mothers who were anxious were not at increased risk for subsequent inattention symptoms in an analysis of 8,725 mothers and their children participating in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children, a prospective epidemiologic cohort study ongoing in southwest England since 1991, said Dr. Bolea, a psychiatrist at the University of Toronto.
These findings have practical implications for clinical care: “If we know that women who are anxious in the perinatal period put their children at risk for hyperactivity later on, then we can tackle their anxiety in pregnancy or toddlerhood. And that’s easy to do: You can do group [cognitive-behavioral therapy]; you can give medications, so there are things you can do to reduce that risk. That’s relevant, because we don’t know much about how to reduce levels of ADHD. We know it has a genetic component, but we can’t touch that. You cannot change your genes, so far. But environmental things, we can change. So if we can identify the mothers who are more anxious during pregnancy and toddlerhood and give them resources to reduce their anxiety, then we can potentially reduce hyperactivity later on,” she explained in an interview.
In the Avon study, maternal anxiety was serially assessed from early pregnancy up until a child’s 5th birthday.
“We looked for maternal symptoms similar to panic disorder: shortness of breath, dizziness, sweating, things like that. These are symptoms that any clinician can identify by asking the mothers, so it’s not hard to identify the mothers who could be at risk,” according to the psychiatrist.
Children in the Avon study were assessed for symptoms of inattention at age 8.5 years using the Sky Search, Sky Search Dual Test, and Opposite Worlds subtests of the Tests of Everyday Attention for Children. Hyperactivity symptoms were assessed at age 16 years via the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire.
In an analysis adjusted for potentially confounding sociodemographic factors, adolescents whose mothers were rated by investigators as having moderate or high somatic anxiety during pregnancy and the toddlerhood years were at 2.1-fold increased risk of hyperactivity symptoms compared to those whose mothers had low or no anxiety, but increased maternal anxiety wasn’t associated with scores on any of the three tests of inattention.
Dr. Bolea cautioned that, while these Avon study findings document an association between early maternal anxiety and subsequent adolescent hyperactivity, that doesn’t prove causality. The findings are consistent, however, with the fetal origins hypothesis put forth by the late British epidemiologist David J. Barker, MD, PhD, which postulates that stressful fetal circumstances have profound effects later in life.
she said.
The hypothesis has been borne out in animal studies: Stress a pregnant rat, and her offspring will display hyperactivity.
Dr. Bolea reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study. The Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children is funded by the Medical Research Council and the Wellcome Trust.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Lumateperone for schizophrenia shows safety, tolerability in long-term study
COPENHAGEN – Lumateperone, a novel investigational drug for schizophrenia with a unique triple mechanism of action, showed impressive safety and tolerability while achieving a continuous decline in schizophrenia symptoms over the course of a year in a long-term, open-label study, Suresh Durgam, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Indeed, patients on lumateperone at the 1-year mark showed significant reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, serum prolactin, and body weight, compared with baseline values recorded when participants were on various standard-of-care antipsychotics prior to switching. Other cardiometabolic parameters, including fasting blood glucose, insulin, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterol, showed only negligible change over the course of study, according to Dr. Durgam, a psychiatrist and senior vice president for late-stage clinical development and medical affairs at Intra-Cellular Therapies, the New York–based company developing lumateperone as its lead product.
This favorable cardiometabolic profile contrasts sharply with those of currently available antipsychotic agents, many of which worsen cardiometabolic risk factors. That would seem to be a major advantage for lumateperone and is likely to be a factor in the Food and Drug Administration’s ongoing deliberation over the company’s new drug application. Dr. Durgam said.
Intra-Cellular Therapies’ stock price took a hit in July 2019, when the FDA abruptly canceled an advisory committee meeting scheduled to consider lumateperone. The agency sought additional information on animal toxicology studies. Having received it from the company, the FDA now no longer plans to schedule an advisory committee meeting before issuing its marketing approval decision.
Lumateperone is an oral once-daily drug that doesn’t require titration. Its high degree of tolerability is thought to be attributable to the drug’s mechanism of action, which involves simultaneous modulation of three different neurotransmitter pathways: serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate. The drug is a potent serotonin 5-HT2a antagonist and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, a dopamine D2 presynaptic partial agonist and postsynaptic antagonist, and it also modulates glutamate via activation of the D1 receptor.
Three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of 4-6 weeks duration have been completed in a total of 1,481 patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Two trials were positive, with lumateperone achieving significantly greater mean reductions in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score than placebo, while the third was negative, with no significant between-group difference. Of note, the safety profile of lumateperone was indistinguishable from placebo with the sole exception of somnolence, where the 20% incidence was twice that of placebo-treated controls. However, in the open-label program, dosing was switched from morning to evening, with a resultant drop in somnolence to the placebo level, Dr. Durgam said.
The open-label program has two parts. Part 1 was conducted in 302 patients with stable, generally mild schizophrenia symptoms while on risperidone, olanzapine, or various other antipsychotics commonly prescribed in the United States. They were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg once daily for 6 weeks, at which point they demonstrated significant reductions in body weight, serum prolactin, insulin, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol. They then were switched back to their former medications, with a resultant worsening of those parameters to prelumateperone levels, providing evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship with cardiometabolic risk factors.
Part 2 of the open-label program is the long-term study, in which 603 patients with stable symptoms on standard-of-care antipsychotics were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg/day, to be followed for 1 year or more. Dr. Durgam presented an interim analysis focused on the first 107 patients to achieve the 1-year treatment milestone. Most were obese at baseline: the group’s mean body mass index was 31.3 kg/m2. They experienced progressive weight loss, with a mean reduction of 1.82 kg on day 175 and 3.16 kg on day 350. About 24% of subjects had a 7% or greater reduction in body weight, while 8% had at least a 7% weight gain. Waist circumference decreased by an average of 5.2 cm from a baseline of 103.2 cm in men and by 1.9 cm in women.
The primary focus of the ongoing long-term study is safety. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events during a full year of therapy were dry mouth, headache, and diarrhea, each occurring in about 7% of patients. Only 0.8% of patients developed extrapyramidal symptoms.
At 150 days of treatment in 340 patients, 30% had achieved a PANSS response, defined as at least a 20% improvement in PANSS total score, compared with baseline. At 300 days in the smaller group who had reached that milestone at the time of the interim analysis, the PANSS response rate had grown to 41%.
Among patients with schizophrenia and comorbid depression as defined by a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) score of 6 or more at baseline, lumateperone at 42 mg/day improved depressive symptoms, such that 60% of those patients achieved a CDSS response – that is, at least a 50% reduction in the score – by day 75. This finding supports data from earlier short-term studies, and suggests that lumateperone’s multiple mechanisms of action and high tolerability make it a promising candidate for treatment of depression and other symptom domains of schizophrenia that are currently inadequately treated, according to Dr. Durgam.
Dr. Durgam also presented an update on the lumateperone program for bipolar depression, which consists of three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week-long clinical trials totaling 1,455 patients. Two have been completed: one positive and the other negative with an unusually high placebo response rate. The ongoing third trial will be the tiebreaker. Safety and tolerability have been as noted in other lumateperone studies.
In the positive trial, the primary efficacy endpoint was change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, which improved in lumateperone-treated patients by an average of 16.7 points from a baseline score of just over 30, a significantly better result than the 12.1-point reduction in placebo-treated controls. The treatment benefit was similar in bipolar I and bipolar II patients.
The phase 3 trial* for treatment of agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias was stopped early for lack of efficacy in an interim analysis. And lumateperone is in ongoing phase 2 trials for sleep disturbances associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. The phase 2 study* in major depressive disorder has been completed.
*This article was updated 9/28/2019.
COPENHAGEN – Lumateperone, a novel investigational drug for schizophrenia with a unique triple mechanism of action, showed impressive safety and tolerability while achieving a continuous decline in schizophrenia symptoms over the course of a year in a long-term, open-label study, Suresh Durgam, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Indeed, patients on lumateperone at the 1-year mark showed significant reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, serum prolactin, and body weight, compared with baseline values recorded when participants were on various standard-of-care antipsychotics prior to switching. Other cardiometabolic parameters, including fasting blood glucose, insulin, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterol, showed only negligible change over the course of study, according to Dr. Durgam, a psychiatrist and senior vice president for late-stage clinical development and medical affairs at Intra-Cellular Therapies, the New York–based company developing lumateperone as its lead product.
This favorable cardiometabolic profile contrasts sharply with those of currently available antipsychotic agents, many of which worsen cardiometabolic risk factors. That would seem to be a major advantage for lumateperone and is likely to be a factor in the Food and Drug Administration’s ongoing deliberation over the company’s new drug application. Dr. Durgam said.
Intra-Cellular Therapies’ stock price took a hit in July 2019, when the FDA abruptly canceled an advisory committee meeting scheduled to consider lumateperone. The agency sought additional information on animal toxicology studies. Having received it from the company, the FDA now no longer plans to schedule an advisory committee meeting before issuing its marketing approval decision.
Lumateperone is an oral once-daily drug that doesn’t require titration. Its high degree of tolerability is thought to be attributable to the drug’s mechanism of action, which involves simultaneous modulation of three different neurotransmitter pathways: serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate. The drug is a potent serotonin 5-HT2a antagonist and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, a dopamine D2 presynaptic partial agonist and postsynaptic antagonist, and it also modulates glutamate via activation of the D1 receptor.
Three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of 4-6 weeks duration have been completed in a total of 1,481 patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Two trials were positive, with lumateperone achieving significantly greater mean reductions in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score than placebo, while the third was negative, with no significant between-group difference. Of note, the safety profile of lumateperone was indistinguishable from placebo with the sole exception of somnolence, where the 20% incidence was twice that of placebo-treated controls. However, in the open-label program, dosing was switched from morning to evening, with a resultant drop in somnolence to the placebo level, Dr. Durgam said.
The open-label program has two parts. Part 1 was conducted in 302 patients with stable, generally mild schizophrenia symptoms while on risperidone, olanzapine, or various other antipsychotics commonly prescribed in the United States. They were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg once daily for 6 weeks, at which point they demonstrated significant reductions in body weight, serum prolactin, insulin, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol. They then were switched back to their former medications, with a resultant worsening of those parameters to prelumateperone levels, providing evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship with cardiometabolic risk factors.
Part 2 of the open-label program is the long-term study, in which 603 patients with stable symptoms on standard-of-care antipsychotics were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg/day, to be followed for 1 year or more. Dr. Durgam presented an interim analysis focused on the first 107 patients to achieve the 1-year treatment milestone. Most were obese at baseline: the group’s mean body mass index was 31.3 kg/m2. They experienced progressive weight loss, with a mean reduction of 1.82 kg on day 175 and 3.16 kg on day 350. About 24% of subjects had a 7% or greater reduction in body weight, while 8% had at least a 7% weight gain. Waist circumference decreased by an average of 5.2 cm from a baseline of 103.2 cm in men and by 1.9 cm in women.
The primary focus of the ongoing long-term study is safety. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events during a full year of therapy were dry mouth, headache, and diarrhea, each occurring in about 7% of patients. Only 0.8% of patients developed extrapyramidal symptoms.
At 150 days of treatment in 340 patients, 30% had achieved a PANSS response, defined as at least a 20% improvement in PANSS total score, compared with baseline. At 300 days in the smaller group who had reached that milestone at the time of the interim analysis, the PANSS response rate had grown to 41%.
Among patients with schizophrenia and comorbid depression as defined by a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) score of 6 or more at baseline, lumateperone at 42 mg/day improved depressive symptoms, such that 60% of those patients achieved a CDSS response – that is, at least a 50% reduction in the score – by day 75. This finding supports data from earlier short-term studies, and suggests that lumateperone’s multiple mechanisms of action and high tolerability make it a promising candidate for treatment of depression and other symptom domains of schizophrenia that are currently inadequately treated, according to Dr. Durgam.
Dr. Durgam also presented an update on the lumateperone program for bipolar depression, which consists of three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week-long clinical trials totaling 1,455 patients. Two have been completed: one positive and the other negative with an unusually high placebo response rate. The ongoing third trial will be the tiebreaker. Safety and tolerability have been as noted in other lumateperone studies.
In the positive trial, the primary efficacy endpoint was change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, which improved in lumateperone-treated patients by an average of 16.7 points from a baseline score of just over 30, a significantly better result than the 12.1-point reduction in placebo-treated controls. The treatment benefit was similar in bipolar I and bipolar II patients.
The phase 3 trial* for treatment of agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias was stopped early for lack of efficacy in an interim analysis. And lumateperone is in ongoing phase 2 trials for sleep disturbances associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. The phase 2 study* in major depressive disorder has been completed.
*This article was updated 9/28/2019.
COPENHAGEN – Lumateperone, a novel investigational drug for schizophrenia with a unique triple mechanism of action, showed impressive safety and tolerability while achieving a continuous decline in schizophrenia symptoms over the course of a year in a long-term, open-label study, Suresh Durgam, MD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
Indeed, patients on lumateperone at the 1-year mark showed significant reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, serum prolactin, and body weight, compared with baseline values recorded when participants were on various standard-of-care antipsychotics prior to switching. Other cardiometabolic parameters, including fasting blood glucose, insulin, triglycerides, and HDL cholesterol, showed only negligible change over the course of study, according to Dr. Durgam, a psychiatrist and senior vice president for late-stage clinical development and medical affairs at Intra-Cellular Therapies, the New York–based company developing lumateperone as its lead product.
This favorable cardiometabolic profile contrasts sharply with those of currently available antipsychotic agents, many of which worsen cardiometabolic risk factors. That would seem to be a major advantage for lumateperone and is likely to be a factor in the Food and Drug Administration’s ongoing deliberation over the company’s new drug application. Dr. Durgam said.
Intra-Cellular Therapies’ stock price took a hit in July 2019, when the FDA abruptly canceled an advisory committee meeting scheduled to consider lumateperone. The agency sought additional information on animal toxicology studies. Having received it from the company, the FDA now no longer plans to schedule an advisory committee meeting before issuing its marketing approval decision.
Lumateperone is an oral once-daily drug that doesn’t require titration. Its high degree of tolerability is thought to be attributable to the drug’s mechanism of action, which involves simultaneous modulation of three different neurotransmitter pathways: serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate. The drug is a potent serotonin 5-HT2a antagonist and serotonin reuptake inhibitor, a dopamine D2 presynaptic partial agonist and postsynaptic antagonist, and it also modulates glutamate via activation of the D1 receptor.
Three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized clinical trials of 4-6 weeks duration have been completed in a total of 1,481 patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Two trials were positive, with lumateperone achieving significantly greater mean reductions in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score than placebo, while the third was negative, with no significant between-group difference. Of note, the safety profile of lumateperone was indistinguishable from placebo with the sole exception of somnolence, where the 20% incidence was twice that of placebo-treated controls. However, in the open-label program, dosing was switched from morning to evening, with a resultant drop in somnolence to the placebo level, Dr. Durgam said.
The open-label program has two parts. Part 1 was conducted in 302 patients with stable, generally mild schizophrenia symptoms while on risperidone, olanzapine, or various other antipsychotics commonly prescribed in the United States. They were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg once daily for 6 weeks, at which point they demonstrated significant reductions in body weight, serum prolactin, insulin, total cholesterol, and LDL cholesterol. They then were switched back to their former medications, with a resultant worsening of those parameters to prelumateperone levels, providing evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship with cardiometabolic risk factors.
Part 2 of the open-label program is the long-term study, in which 603 patients with stable symptoms on standard-of-care antipsychotics were switched to lumateperone at 42 mg/day, to be followed for 1 year or more. Dr. Durgam presented an interim analysis focused on the first 107 patients to achieve the 1-year treatment milestone. Most were obese at baseline: the group’s mean body mass index was 31.3 kg/m2. They experienced progressive weight loss, with a mean reduction of 1.82 kg on day 175 and 3.16 kg on day 350. About 24% of subjects had a 7% or greater reduction in body weight, while 8% had at least a 7% weight gain. Waist circumference decreased by an average of 5.2 cm from a baseline of 103.2 cm in men and by 1.9 cm in women.
The primary focus of the ongoing long-term study is safety. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events during a full year of therapy were dry mouth, headache, and diarrhea, each occurring in about 7% of patients. Only 0.8% of patients developed extrapyramidal symptoms.
At 150 days of treatment in 340 patients, 30% had achieved a PANSS response, defined as at least a 20% improvement in PANSS total score, compared with baseline. At 300 days in the smaller group who had reached that milestone at the time of the interim analysis, the PANSS response rate had grown to 41%.
Among patients with schizophrenia and comorbid depression as defined by a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS) score of 6 or more at baseline, lumateperone at 42 mg/day improved depressive symptoms, such that 60% of those patients achieved a CDSS response – that is, at least a 50% reduction in the score – by day 75. This finding supports data from earlier short-term studies, and suggests that lumateperone’s multiple mechanisms of action and high tolerability make it a promising candidate for treatment of depression and other symptom domains of schizophrenia that are currently inadequately treated, according to Dr. Durgam.
Dr. Durgam also presented an update on the lumateperone program for bipolar depression, which consists of three phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week-long clinical trials totaling 1,455 patients. Two have been completed: one positive and the other negative with an unusually high placebo response rate. The ongoing third trial will be the tiebreaker. Safety and tolerability have been as noted in other lumateperone studies.
In the positive trial, the primary efficacy endpoint was change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale, which improved in lumateperone-treated patients by an average of 16.7 points from a baseline score of just over 30, a significantly better result than the 12.1-point reduction in placebo-treated controls. The treatment benefit was similar in bipolar I and bipolar II patients.
The phase 3 trial* for treatment of agitation in patients with Alzheimer’s disease and other dementias was stopped early for lack of efficacy in an interim analysis. And lumateperone is in ongoing phase 2 trials for sleep disturbances associated with neuropsychiatric disorders. The phase 2 study* in major depressive disorder has been completed.
*This article was updated 9/28/2019.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Virtual dark therapy tames manic episodes
COPENHAGEN – Bright light therapy is a well-established, guideline-recommended treatment for seasonal affective disorder, and many people prone to depression keep a light box at home. But are you ready to embrace the dark side – that is, dark therapy for bipolar mania, or its vastly more patient-friendly offshoot, virtual dark therapy?
And it’s a lot easier on patients than the massive sensory deprivation imposed by the original form of dark therapy, which entails keeping a patient with mania in a completely dark room for 14 hours per night, Tone E.G. Henriksen, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
She was lead author of a pioneering randomized controlled trial demonstrating that bipolar patients who wore blue-blocking, orange-tinted glasses for 14 hours per evening while hospitalized for a manic episode experienced a significant improvement in scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), compared with patients randomized to wearing clear lenses. Moreover, the between-group difference achieved strong significance in just 3 days.
That’s a remarkable result, because bipolar mania is such a challenge to treat pharmacologically. The standard medications – mood stabilizers and antipsychotic agents – are slow in onset of effect, observed Dr. Henriksen, a psychiatrist at the University of Bergen (Norway).
Backing up, she noted there is strong evidence of seasonality to bipolar disorder, as highlighted in a systematic review of 51 publications (J Affect Disord. 2014 Oct;168:210-23). This recognition has prompted numerous researchers to focus attention on the abnormal circadian rhythms prevalent in patients with bipolar disorder, for which the light/dark cycle is a powerful synchronizing signal to the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus, the master clock of circadian rhythms. This understanding led to a landmark case control pilot study by Italian investigators who exposed 16 bipolar inpatients experiencing a manic episode to 14 hours of complete darkness from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 3 consecutive nights. The outcome was a dramatic reduction in YMRS scores in the dark therapy group, compared with 16 matched control inpatients, with all participants on pharmacologic treatment as usual (Bipolar Disord. 2005 Feb;7[1]:98-101).
“This was really something,” Dr. Henriksen recalled.
She and her colleagues were impressed by other investigators’ discovery of specialized retinal ganglion cells, known as intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells, which are responsible for conveying the daylight signal to the brain. These specialized cells contain melanopsin, which is blue light sensitive. The Norwegian investigators reasoned that it might not be necessary to expose patients with mania to prolonged utter darkness to achieve rapid symptomatic improvement, as the Italian psychiatrists did. Instead, they hypothesized, it might be sufficient just to block the blue light, low-wavelength end of the spectrum. And that turned out to be the case.
Their randomized, single-blind, multicenter study included 23 patients with bipolar disorder who were hospitalized for manic symptoms. All remained on their standard background psychiatric medications while being randomized to wear orange-tinted, blue light–blocking glasses, which allowed passage of almost all light above 530 nm, or clear glasses. Participants were instructed to wear their glasses from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 7 consecutive nights. They took their glasses off when they switched off the lights at bedtime, but they had to put them back on if they turned on a light before 8 a.m. The patients also wore an activity monitor.
The results were dramatic: The blue-blocking glasses group had a mean 14.1-point drop in their YMRS score from a baseline of about 25, compared with a mere 1.7-point decline in the control group. Moreover, Dr. Henriksen said, this result might actually underrepresent the true clinical effect of blocking blue light to the brain, since two patients in the blue-blocking glasses group experienced such rapid symptomatic improvement that they were moved from an acute psychiatric ward to a local hospital midstudy, a sudden change that triggered transient worsening of manic symptoms in both patients.
The investigators documented improved sleep efficiency in the blue-blocking group. Another noteworthy finding was that, in the blue-blocking group, the elements of the YMRS related to increased activation declined before the measures of distorted thoughts and perceptions. So did motor activity as recorded by actigraph. Meanwhile, nighttime activity worsened in the control group; they received substantially more sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytic agents, and antipsychotic medications (Bipolar Disord. 2016 May;18[3]:221-32).
The mechanism underlying the improvement in sleep regularity and manic symptoms achieved by blocking blue light is not understood. Dr. Henriksen finds “very compelling” a theory put forth by prominent chronobiologist Daniel Kripke, MD, of the University of California, San Diego. He has shown in animal studies that a change in light exposure can trigger bifurcation in the circadian rhythms of the suprachiasmatic nucleus. The resultant suppression of melatonin secretion results in excess production of hypothalamic triiodothyronine, which in turn affects production of other key hormones. In patients with bipolar disorder, this could trigger mania, according to Dr. Kripke (F1000Res. 2015 May 6;4:107.
Dr. Henriksen reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study, which was conducted free of commercial support. She serves as a consultant to Chrono Chrome AS.
COPENHAGEN – Bright light therapy is a well-established, guideline-recommended treatment for seasonal affective disorder, and many people prone to depression keep a light box at home. But are you ready to embrace the dark side – that is, dark therapy for bipolar mania, or its vastly more patient-friendly offshoot, virtual dark therapy?
And it’s a lot easier on patients than the massive sensory deprivation imposed by the original form of dark therapy, which entails keeping a patient with mania in a completely dark room for 14 hours per night, Tone E.G. Henriksen, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
She was lead author of a pioneering randomized controlled trial demonstrating that bipolar patients who wore blue-blocking, orange-tinted glasses for 14 hours per evening while hospitalized for a manic episode experienced a significant improvement in scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), compared with patients randomized to wearing clear lenses. Moreover, the between-group difference achieved strong significance in just 3 days.
That’s a remarkable result, because bipolar mania is such a challenge to treat pharmacologically. The standard medications – mood stabilizers and antipsychotic agents – are slow in onset of effect, observed Dr. Henriksen, a psychiatrist at the University of Bergen (Norway).
Backing up, she noted there is strong evidence of seasonality to bipolar disorder, as highlighted in a systematic review of 51 publications (J Affect Disord. 2014 Oct;168:210-23). This recognition has prompted numerous researchers to focus attention on the abnormal circadian rhythms prevalent in patients with bipolar disorder, for which the light/dark cycle is a powerful synchronizing signal to the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus, the master clock of circadian rhythms. This understanding led to a landmark case control pilot study by Italian investigators who exposed 16 bipolar inpatients experiencing a manic episode to 14 hours of complete darkness from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 3 consecutive nights. The outcome was a dramatic reduction in YMRS scores in the dark therapy group, compared with 16 matched control inpatients, with all participants on pharmacologic treatment as usual (Bipolar Disord. 2005 Feb;7[1]:98-101).
“This was really something,” Dr. Henriksen recalled.
She and her colleagues were impressed by other investigators’ discovery of specialized retinal ganglion cells, known as intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells, which are responsible for conveying the daylight signal to the brain. These specialized cells contain melanopsin, which is blue light sensitive. The Norwegian investigators reasoned that it might not be necessary to expose patients with mania to prolonged utter darkness to achieve rapid symptomatic improvement, as the Italian psychiatrists did. Instead, they hypothesized, it might be sufficient just to block the blue light, low-wavelength end of the spectrum. And that turned out to be the case.
Their randomized, single-blind, multicenter study included 23 patients with bipolar disorder who were hospitalized for manic symptoms. All remained on their standard background psychiatric medications while being randomized to wear orange-tinted, blue light–blocking glasses, which allowed passage of almost all light above 530 nm, or clear glasses. Participants were instructed to wear their glasses from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 7 consecutive nights. They took their glasses off when they switched off the lights at bedtime, but they had to put them back on if they turned on a light before 8 a.m. The patients also wore an activity monitor.
The results were dramatic: The blue-blocking glasses group had a mean 14.1-point drop in their YMRS score from a baseline of about 25, compared with a mere 1.7-point decline in the control group. Moreover, Dr. Henriksen said, this result might actually underrepresent the true clinical effect of blocking blue light to the brain, since two patients in the blue-blocking glasses group experienced such rapid symptomatic improvement that they were moved from an acute psychiatric ward to a local hospital midstudy, a sudden change that triggered transient worsening of manic symptoms in both patients.
The investigators documented improved sleep efficiency in the blue-blocking group. Another noteworthy finding was that, in the blue-blocking group, the elements of the YMRS related to increased activation declined before the measures of distorted thoughts and perceptions. So did motor activity as recorded by actigraph. Meanwhile, nighttime activity worsened in the control group; they received substantially more sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytic agents, and antipsychotic medications (Bipolar Disord. 2016 May;18[3]:221-32).
The mechanism underlying the improvement in sleep regularity and manic symptoms achieved by blocking blue light is not understood. Dr. Henriksen finds “very compelling” a theory put forth by prominent chronobiologist Daniel Kripke, MD, of the University of California, San Diego. He has shown in animal studies that a change in light exposure can trigger bifurcation in the circadian rhythms of the suprachiasmatic nucleus. The resultant suppression of melatonin secretion results in excess production of hypothalamic triiodothyronine, which in turn affects production of other key hormones. In patients with bipolar disorder, this could trigger mania, according to Dr. Kripke (F1000Res. 2015 May 6;4:107.
Dr. Henriksen reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study, which was conducted free of commercial support. She serves as a consultant to Chrono Chrome AS.
COPENHAGEN – Bright light therapy is a well-established, guideline-recommended treatment for seasonal affective disorder, and many people prone to depression keep a light box at home. But are you ready to embrace the dark side – that is, dark therapy for bipolar mania, or its vastly more patient-friendly offshoot, virtual dark therapy?
And it’s a lot easier on patients than the massive sensory deprivation imposed by the original form of dark therapy, which entails keeping a patient with mania in a completely dark room for 14 hours per night, Tone E.G. Henriksen, MD, observed at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
She was lead author of a pioneering randomized controlled trial demonstrating that bipolar patients who wore blue-blocking, orange-tinted glasses for 14 hours per evening while hospitalized for a manic episode experienced a significant improvement in scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), compared with patients randomized to wearing clear lenses. Moreover, the between-group difference achieved strong significance in just 3 days.
That’s a remarkable result, because bipolar mania is such a challenge to treat pharmacologically. The standard medications – mood stabilizers and antipsychotic agents – are slow in onset of effect, observed Dr. Henriksen, a psychiatrist at the University of Bergen (Norway).
Backing up, she noted there is strong evidence of seasonality to bipolar disorder, as highlighted in a systematic review of 51 publications (J Affect Disord. 2014 Oct;168:210-23). This recognition has prompted numerous researchers to focus attention on the abnormal circadian rhythms prevalent in patients with bipolar disorder, for which the light/dark cycle is a powerful synchronizing signal to the hypothalamic suprachiasmatic nucleus, the master clock of circadian rhythms. This understanding led to a landmark case control pilot study by Italian investigators who exposed 16 bipolar inpatients experiencing a manic episode to 14 hours of complete darkness from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 3 consecutive nights. The outcome was a dramatic reduction in YMRS scores in the dark therapy group, compared with 16 matched control inpatients, with all participants on pharmacologic treatment as usual (Bipolar Disord. 2005 Feb;7[1]:98-101).
“This was really something,” Dr. Henriksen recalled.
She and her colleagues were impressed by other investigators’ discovery of specialized retinal ganglion cells, known as intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells, which are responsible for conveying the daylight signal to the brain. These specialized cells contain melanopsin, which is blue light sensitive. The Norwegian investigators reasoned that it might not be necessary to expose patients with mania to prolonged utter darkness to achieve rapid symptomatic improvement, as the Italian psychiatrists did. Instead, they hypothesized, it might be sufficient just to block the blue light, low-wavelength end of the spectrum. And that turned out to be the case.
Their randomized, single-blind, multicenter study included 23 patients with bipolar disorder who were hospitalized for manic symptoms. All remained on their standard background psychiatric medications while being randomized to wear orange-tinted, blue light–blocking glasses, which allowed passage of almost all light above 530 nm, or clear glasses. Participants were instructed to wear their glasses from 6 p.m. to 8 a.m. for 7 consecutive nights. They took their glasses off when they switched off the lights at bedtime, but they had to put them back on if they turned on a light before 8 a.m. The patients also wore an activity monitor.
The results were dramatic: The blue-blocking glasses group had a mean 14.1-point drop in their YMRS score from a baseline of about 25, compared with a mere 1.7-point decline in the control group. Moreover, Dr. Henriksen said, this result might actually underrepresent the true clinical effect of blocking blue light to the brain, since two patients in the blue-blocking glasses group experienced such rapid symptomatic improvement that they were moved from an acute psychiatric ward to a local hospital midstudy, a sudden change that triggered transient worsening of manic symptoms in both patients.
The investigators documented improved sleep efficiency in the blue-blocking group. Another noteworthy finding was that, in the blue-blocking group, the elements of the YMRS related to increased activation declined before the measures of distorted thoughts and perceptions. So did motor activity as recorded by actigraph. Meanwhile, nighttime activity worsened in the control group; they received substantially more sedatives, hypnotics, anxiolytic agents, and antipsychotic medications (Bipolar Disord. 2016 May;18[3]:221-32).
The mechanism underlying the improvement in sleep regularity and manic symptoms achieved by blocking blue light is not understood. Dr. Henriksen finds “very compelling” a theory put forth by prominent chronobiologist Daniel Kripke, MD, of the University of California, San Diego. He has shown in animal studies that a change in light exposure can trigger bifurcation in the circadian rhythms of the suprachiasmatic nucleus. The resultant suppression of melatonin secretion results in excess production of hypothalamic triiodothyronine, which in turn affects production of other key hormones. In patients with bipolar disorder, this could trigger mania, according to Dr. Kripke (F1000Res. 2015 May 6;4:107.
Dr. Henriksen reported having no financial conflicts regarding her study, which was conducted free of commercial support. She serves as a consultant to Chrono Chrome AS.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Deep transcranial magnetic stimulation alleviates OCD symptoms
COPENHAGEN – High-frequency deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) directed at the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex proved to be a safe and effective nonpharmacologic treatment for symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder in an international, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial that earned the device clearance for that indication from the Food and Drug Administration.
“Deep TMS is a relatively new form of TMS that allows direct stimulation of deeper neuronal pathways than standard TMS. It induces a direct effective field at a depth of 3-5 cm below the skull, compared to less than 1.5 cm for the standard TMS figure-eight coil,” said Dr. Carmi, of Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, Israel.
The brain circuitry involved in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is very well known. Multiple potential targets for intervention are available. Dr. Carmi and coinvestigators focused on the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, because this is an area that’s very much involved in OCD – it’s the generator of increased error-related negativity on the Stroop task – and it can be stimulated by dTMS, whereas standard TMS can’t reach it.
This was not only the first major clinical trial to successfully target the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex using any form of TMS, it also was the first study to employ individually tailored symptom provocation using photos or a written script immediately before each treatment session. At the first patient encounter, the investigators created a list of what distressed that particular individual – for example, touching a public bathroom door handle or experiencing doubt about whether the stove had been left on – and then prior to each treatment session they deliberately provoked each study participant using representations of those triggers. The treatment, real or sham, didn’t begin until a patient’s distress level measured 4-7 on a visual analog scale.
“The idea is to deliver the treatment when the brain circuitry is aroused and not while the patient is thinking about the shopping he needs to get done after the session is over,” Dr. Carmi explained.
He was first author of the recently published pivotal study (Am J Psychiatry. 2019 May 21. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.18101180) in which 99 adults aged up to age 65 years with OCD refractory to at least one selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor underwent real or sham dTMS every weekday for 5 consecutive weeks, plus four sessions during week 6. That’s a total of 29 sessions, featuring 2,000 magnetic stimulations per session. The study was conducted at 11 centers in the United States, Canada, and Israel. Participants had to remain on an approved drug therapy for OCD or engaged in psychotherapy throughout the study.
The primary efficacy outcome was the change in scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) from baseline to 6 weeks. Patients who received dTMS averaged a 6.0-point reduction, significantly better than the 3.3-point reduction in the sham-treatment group. The treatment response rate, as defined by at least a 30% reduction from baseline in YBOCS score, was 38% with dTMS, compared with 11% in controls. One month after the final treatment session, the response rate was 45% in the active-treatment arm, compared with less than 18% in the sham-treatment group.
In addition, 55% of patients in the active-treatment group achieved a partial response of more than a 20% reduction in YBOCS score, a rate slightly more than twice that in the sham group.
To put those findings in perspective, Dr. Carmi highlighted treatment effect–size results from OCD drug trials involving fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, sertraline, and paroxetine, all FDA-approved for treatment of OCD. The placebo-subtracted mean change in YBOCS scores in the pharmacotherapy trials were similar to the sham treatment–subtracted result in the dTMS study, with one important distinction: “In terms of change in YBOCS, it took 10-12 weeks to get those results in the drug trials, while we have shown this in a 6-week period of time,” he noted.
The only adverse effect associated with dTMS was headaches. They occurred in about one-third of the dTMS group and in a similar proportion of controls early on in the study, but they became a nonissue later.
“I have to say, we recruited 99 patients for the multicenter study, but only 2 of them dropped out because of side effects,” Dr. Carmi noted.
He reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, sponsored by Brainsway, which markets the dTMS device for the FDA-cleared indications of treatment-resistant depression and OCD.
COPENHAGEN – High-frequency deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) directed at the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex proved to be a safe and effective nonpharmacologic treatment for symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder in an international, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial that earned the device clearance for that indication from the Food and Drug Administration.
“Deep TMS is a relatively new form of TMS that allows direct stimulation of deeper neuronal pathways than standard TMS. It induces a direct effective field at a depth of 3-5 cm below the skull, compared to less than 1.5 cm for the standard TMS figure-eight coil,” said Dr. Carmi, of Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, Israel.
The brain circuitry involved in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is very well known. Multiple potential targets for intervention are available. Dr. Carmi and coinvestigators focused on the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, because this is an area that’s very much involved in OCD – it’s the generator of increased error-related negativity on the Stroop task – and it can be stimulated by dTMS, whereas standard TMS can’t reach it.
This was not only the first major clinical trial to successfully target the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex using any form of TMS, it also was the first study to employ individually tailored symptom provocation using photos or a written script immediately before each treatment session. At the first patient encounter, the investigators created a list of what distressed that particular individual – for example, touching a public bathroom door handle or experiencing doubt about whether the stove had been left on – and then prior to each treatment session they deliberately provoked each study participant using representations of those triggers. The treatment, real or sham, didn’t begin until a patient’s distress level measured 4-7 on a visual analog scale.
“The idea is to deliver the treatment when the brain circuitry is aroused and not while the patient is thinking about the shopping he needs to get done after the session is over,” Dr. Carmi explained.
He was first author of the recently published pivotal study (Am J Psychiatry. 2019 May 21. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.18101180) in which 99 adults aged up to age 65 years with OCD refractory to at least one selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor underwent real or sham dTMS every weekday for 5 consecutive weeks, plus four sessions during week 6. That’s a total of 29 sessions, featuring 2,000 magnetic stimulations per session. The study was conducted at 11 centers in the United States, Canada, and Israel. Participants had to remain on an approved drug therapy for OCD or engaged in psychotherapy throughout the study.
The primary efficacy outcome was the change in scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) from baseline to 6 weeks. Patients who received dTMS averaged a 6.0-point reduction, significantly better than the 3.3-point reduction in the sham-treatment group. The treatment response rate, as defined by at least a 30% reduction from baseline in YBOCS score, was 38% with dTMS, compared with 11% in controls. One month after the final treatment session, the response rate was 45% in the active-treatment arm, compared with less than 18% in the sham-treatment group.
In addition, 55% of patients in the active-treatment group achieved a partial response of more than a 20% reduction in YBOCS score, a rate slightly more than twice that in the sham group.
To put those findings in perspective, Dr. Carmi highlighted treatment effect–size results from OCD drug trials involving fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, sertraline, and paroxetine, all FDA-approved for treatment of OCD. The placebo-subtracted mean change in YBOCS scores in the pharmacotherapy trials were similar to the sham treatment–subtracted result in the dTMS study, with one important distinction: “In terms of change in YBOCS, it took 10-12 weeks to get those results in the drug trials, while we have shown this in a 6-week period of time,” he noted.
The only adverse effect associated with dTMS was headaches. They occurred in about one-third of the dTMS group and in a similar proportion of controls early on in the study, but they became a nonissue later.
“I have to say, we recruited 99 patients for the multicenter study, but only 2 of them dropped out because of side effects,” Dr. Carmi noted.
He reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, sponsored by Brainsway, which markets the dTMS device for the FDA-cleared indications of treatment-resistant depression and OCD.
COPENHAGEN – High-frequency deep transcranial magnetic stimulation (dTMS) directed at the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex proved to be a safe and effective nonpharmacologic treatment for symptoms of obsessive-compulsive disorder in an international, randomized, sham-controlled, double-blind clinical trial that earned the device clearance for that indication from the Food and Drug Administration.
“Deep TMS is a relatively new form of TMS that allows direct stimulation of deeper neuronal pathways than standard TMS. It induces a direct effective field at a depth of 3-5 cm below the skull, compared to less than 1.5 cm for the standard TMS figure-eight coil,” said Dr. Carmi, of Chaim Sheba Medical Center in Ramat Gan, Israel.
The brain circuitry involved in obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is very well known. Multiple potential targets for intervention are available. Dr. Carmi and coinvestigators focused on the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex, because this is an area that’s very much involved in OCD – it’s the generator of increased error-related negativity on the Stroop task – and it can be stimulated by dTMS, whereas standard TMS can’t reach it.
This was not only the first major clinical trial to successfully target the anterior cingulate cortex and medial prefrontal cortex using any form of TMS, it also was the first study to employ individually tailored symptom provocation using photos or a written script immediately before each treatment session. At the first patient encounter, the investigators created a list of what distressed that particular individual – for example, touching a public bathroom door handle or experiencing doubt about whether the stove had been left on – and then prior to each treatment session they deliberately provoked each study participant using representations of those triggers. The treatment, real or sham, didn’t begin until a patient’s distress level measured 4-7 on a visual analog scale.
“The idea is to deliver the treatment when the brain circuitry is aroused and not while the patient is thinking about the shopping he needs to get done after the session is over,” Dr. Carmi explained.
He was first author of the recently published pivotal study (Am J Psychiatry. 2019 May 21. doi: 10.1176/appi.ajp.2019.18101180) in which 99 adults aged up to age 65 years with OCD refractory to at least one selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor underwent real or sham dTMS every weekday for 5 consecutive weeks, plus four sessions during week 6. That’s a total of 29 sessions, featuring 2,000 magnetic stimulations per session. The study was conducted at 11 centers in the United States, Canada, and Israel. Participants had to remain on an approved drug therapy for OCD or engaged in psychotherapy throughout the study.
The primary efficacy outcome was the change in scores on the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS) from baseline to 6 weeks. Patients who received dTMS averaged a 6.0-point reduction, significantly better than the 3.3-point reduction in the sham-treatment group. The treatment response rate, as defined by at least a 30% reduction from baseline in YBOCS score, was 38% with dTMS, compared with 11% in controls. One month after the final treatment session, the response rate was 45% in the active-treatment arm, compared with less than 18% in the sham-treatment group.
In addition, 55% of patients in the active-treatment group achieved a partial response of more than a 20% reduction in YBOCS score, a rate slightly more than twice that in the sham group.
To put those findings in perspective, Dr. Carmi highlighted treatment effect–size results from OCD drug trials involving fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, sertraline, and paroxetine, all FDA-approved for treatment of OCD. The placebo-subtracted mean change in YBOCS scores in the pharmacotherapy trials were similar to the sham treatment–subtracted result in the dTMS study, with one important distinction: “In terms of change in YBOCS, it took 10-12 weeks to get those results in the drug trials, while we have shown this in a 6-week period of time,” he noted.
The only adverse effect associated with dTMS was headaches. They occurred in about one-third of the dTMS group and in a similar proportion of controls early on in the study, but they became a nonissue later.
“I have to say, we recruited 99 patients for the multicenter study, but only 2 of them dropped out because of side effects,” Dr. Carmi noted.
He reported having no financial conflicts of interest regarding the study, sponsored by Brainsway, which markets the dTMS device for the FDA-cleared indications of treatment-resistant depression and OCD.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Esketamine nasal spray may get expanded indication
COPENHAGEN – Esketamine nasal spray achieved rapid reduction of major depressive disorder symptoms in patients at imminent risk for suicide in a pair of pivotal phase 3 clinical trials known as ASPIRE-1 and ASPIRE-2, Carla M. Canuso, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
These were groundbreaking studies, which addressed a major unmet need familiar to every mental health professional, given that more than 800,000 suicides per year occur worldwide. Standard antidepressants are of only limited value during the period of acute suicidal crisis because they take 4-6 weeks to work. Moreover, this population of seriously depressed and suicidal patients has been understudied.
“Patients with active suicidal ideation and intent are routinely excluded from antidepressant trials,” observed Dr. Canuso, a psychiatrist who serves as senior director of neuroscience clinical development at Janssen Research and Development in Titusville, N.J.
It’s very important for the field to know that we can actually study these patients safely and effectively in clinical trials,” she said.
ASPIRE-1 and -2 were identically designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational studies conducted in patients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder as evidenced by a baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score of about 40, along with moderate to extreme active suicidal ideation and intent as assessed using the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Suicidality-Revised (CGI-SS-R).
“These were all patients in psychiatric crisis seeking clinical care,” according to Dr. Canuso.
All 456 participants in the two phase 3 studies underwent an initial 5-14 days of psychiatric hospitalization, during which they began treatment with esketamine nasal spray at 84 mg twice weekly or placebo coupled with comprehensive standard of care, which included a newly initiated and/or optimized oral antidepressant regimen.
The primary endpoint in the two clinical trials was the change in MADRS total score 24 hours after the first dose of study medication. The esketamine-treated patients demonstrated a mean reduction of 16.4 and 15.7 points, respectively, in the two trials, which was 3.82 points greater than in the pooled placebo group. This represents a clinically meaningful and statistically significant between-group difference.
The treatment effect size was even larger in some of the prespecified patient subgroups. Dr. Canuso drew attention to two key groups: In the roughly 60% of ASPIRE participants with a prior suicide attempt, esketamine resulted in a mean 4.81-point greater reduction in MADRS total score than placebo, and in the nearly 30% of participants with a suicide attempt during the past month, the difference was 5.22 points.
A word on the study design: Patients received intranasal esketamine at 84 mg per dose or placebo in double-blind fashion twice weekly for 4 weeks, thereby giving time for their oral antidepressant therapy to kick in, and were then followed on the conventional therapy out to 90 days.
A between-group difference in MADRS total score in favor of the esketamine group was evident as early as 4 hours after the first dose and continued through day 25, the end of the double-blind treatment period, at which point 54% and 47% of the esketamine-plus-conventional-antidepressant groups in the two trials had achieved remission as defined by a MADRS score of 12 or less, as had about one-third of the control group.
The prespecified key secondary efficacy endpoint in ASPIRE-1 and -2 was change in the CGI-SS-R 24 hours after the first dose. Both the esketamine and placebo-treated patients experienced significant improvement in this domain, with a disappointing absence of between-group statistical significance.
“We think that this may be due to the effect of acute hospitalization in diffusing the suicidal crisis,” Dr. Canuso said.
She noted, however, that other suicidality indices did show significant improvement in the esketamine-treated group during assessments at 4 hours, 24 hours, and 25 days after the first dose. For example, the double-blind esketamine-treated patients were 2.62-fold more likely than controls to show a significant improvement in MADRS Suicidal Thoughts at 4 hours after dose number one, and 6.15 times more likely to do so 4 hours after their day-25 dose. The CGI structured physician assessments of suicide risk and frequency of suicidal thinking, as well as patient-reported frequency of suicidal thinking, showed consistent favorable numeric trends for improvement with esketamine, with odds ratios of 1.46-2.11 from 4 hours through 25 days, although those results generally failed to achieve statistical significance.
In terms of safety, the rate of serious adverse events was just under 12% in both the esketamine and placebo arms. As in earlier studies, the most common adverse events associated with the novel antidepressant were dizziness, dissociation, nausea, and sleepiness, all several-fold more frequent than with placebo.
Esketamine is the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine. It’s a noncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist.
Janssen, which already markets intranasal esketamine as Spravato in the United States for treatment-resistant depression, plans to file for an expanded indication on the basis of the ASPIRE-1 and -2 results. The Food and Drug Administration already has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for research on esketamine for reduction of major depression symptoms in patients with active suicidal ideation.
The ASPIRE studies were funded by Janssen.
COPENHAGEN – Esketamine nasal spray achieved rapid reduction of major depressive disorder symptoms in patients at imminent risk for suicide in a pair of pivotal phase 3 clinical trials known as ASPIRE-1 and ASPIRE-2, Carla M. Canuso, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
These were groundbreaking studies, which addressed a major unmet need familiar to every mental health professional, given that more than 800,000 suicides per year occur worldwide. Standard antidepressants are of only limited value during the period of acute suicidal crisis because they take 4-6 weeks to work. Moreover, this population of seriously depressed and suicidal patients has been understudied.
“Patients with active suicidal ideation and intent are routinely excluded from antidepressant trials,” observed Dr. Canuso, a psychiatrist who serves as senior director of neuroscience clinical development at Janssen Research and Development in Titusville, N.J.
It’s very important for the field to know that we can actually study these patients safely and effectively in clinical trials,” she said.
ASPIRE-1 and -2 were identically designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational studies conducted in patients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder as evidenced by a baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score of about 40, along with moderate to extreme active suicidal ideation and intent as assessed using the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Suicidality-Revised (CGI-SS-R).
“These were all patients in psychiatric crisis seeking clinical care,” according to Dr. Canuso.
All 456 participants in the two phase 3 studies underwent an initial 5-14 days of psychiatric hospitalization, during which they began treatment with esketamine nasal spray at 84 mg twice weekly or placebo coupled with comprehensive standard of care, which included a newly initiated and/or optimized oral antidepressant regimen.
The primary endpoint in the two clinical trials was the change in MADRS total score 24 hours after the first dose of study medication. The esketamine-treated patients demonstrated a mean reduction of 16.4 and 15.7 points, respectively, in the two trials, which was 3.82 points greater than in the pooled placebo group. This represents a clinically meaningful and statistically significant between-group difference.
The treatment effect size was even larger in some of the prespecified patient subgroups. Dr. Canuso drew attention to two key groups: In the roughly 60% of ASPIRE participants with a prior suicide attempt, esketamine resulted in a mean 4.81-point greater reduction in MADRS total score than placebo, and in the nearly 30% of participants with a suicide attempt during the past month, the difference was 5.22 points.
A word on the study design: Patients received intranasal esketamine at 84 mg per dose or placebo in double-blind fashion twice weekly for 4 weeks, thereby giving time for their oral antidepressant therapy to kick in, and were then followed on the conventional therapy out to 90 days.
A between-group difference in MADRS total score in favor of the esketamine group was evident as early as 4 hours after the first dose and continued through day 25, the end of the double-blind treatment period, at which point 54% and 47% of the esketamine-plus-conventional-antidepressant groups in the two trials had achieved remission as defined by a MADRS score of 12 or less, as had about one-third of the control group.
The prespecified key secondary efficacy endpoint in ASPIRE-1 and -2 was change in the CGI-SS-R 24 hours after the first dose. Both the esketamine and placebo-treated patients experienced significant improvement in this domain, with a disappointing absence of between-group statistical significance.
“We think that this may be due to the effect of acute hospitalization in diffusing the suicidal crisis,” Dr. Canuso said.
She noted, however, that other suicidality indices did show significant improvement in the esketamine-treated group during assessments at 4 hours, 24 hours, and 25 days after the first dose. For example, the double-blind esketamine-treated patients were 2.62-fold more likely than controls to show a significant improvement in MADRS Suicidal Thoughts at 4 hours after dose number one, and 6.15 times more likely to do so 4 hours after their day-25 dose. The CGI structured physician assessments of suicide risk and frequency of suicidal thinking, as well as patient-reported frequency of suicidal thinking, showed consistent favorable numeric trends for improvement with esketamine, with odds ratios of 1.46-2.11 from 4 hours through 25 days, although those results generally failed to achieve statistical significance.
In terms of safety, the rate of serious adverse events was just under 12% in both the esketamine and placebo arms. As in earlier studies, the most common adverse events associated with the novel antidepressant were dizziness, dissociation, nausea, and sleepiness, all several-fold more frequent than with placebo.
Esketamine is the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine. It’s a noncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist.
Janssen, which already markets intranasal esketamine as Spravato in the United States for treatment-resistant depression, plans to file for an expanded indication on the basis of the ASPIRE-1 and -2 results. The Food and Drug Administration already has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for research on esketamine for reduction of major depression symptoms in patients with active suicidal ideation.
The ASPIRE studies were funded by Janssen.
COPENHAGEN – Esketamine nasal spray achieved rapid reduction of major depressive disorder symptoms in patients at imminent risk for suicide in a pair of pivotal phase 3 clinical trials known as ASPIRE-1 and ASPIRE-2, Carla M. Canuso, MD, reported at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
These were groundbreaking studies, which addressed a major unmet need familiar to every mental health professional, given that more than 800,000 suicides per year occur worldwide. Standard antidepressants are of only limited value during the period of acute suicidal crisis because they take 4-6 weeks to work. Moreover, this population of seriously depressed and suicidal patients has been understudied.
“Patients with active suicidal ideation and intent are routinely excluded from antidepressant trials,” observed Dr. Canuso, a psychiatrist who serves as senior director of neuroscience clinical development at Janssen Research and Development in Titusville, N.J.
It’s very important for the field to know that we can actually study these patients safely and effectively in clinical trials,” she said.
ASPIRE-1 and -2 were identically designed, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational studies conducted in patients with moderate to severe major depressive disorder as evidenced by a baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score of about 40, along with moderate to extreme active suicidal ideation and intent as assessed using the Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Suicidality-Revised (CGI-SS-R).
“These were all patients in psychiatric crisis seeking clinical care,” according to Dr. Canuso.
All 456 participants in the two phase 3 studies underwent an initial 5-14 days of psychiatric hospitalization, during which they began treatment with esketamine nasal spray at 84 mg twice weekly or placebo coupled with comprehensive standard of care, which included a newly initiated and/or optimized oral antidepressant regimen.
The primary endpoint in the two clinical trials was the change in MADRS total score 24 hours after the first dose of study medication. The esketamine-treated patients demonstrated a mean reduction of 16.4 and 15.7 points, respectively, in the two trials, which was 3.82 points greater than in the pooled placebo group. This represents a clinically meaningful and statistically significant between-group difference.
The treatment effect size was even larger in some of the prespecified patient subgroups. Dr. Canuso drew attention to two key groups: In the roughly 60% of ASPIRE participants with a prior suicide attempt, esketamine resulted in a mean 4.81-point greater reduction in MADRS total score than placebo, and in the nearly 30% of participants with a suicide attempt during the past month, the difference was 5.22 points.
A word on the study design: Patients received intranasal esketamine at 84 mg per dose or placebo in double-blind fashion twice weekly for 4 weeks, thereby giving time for their oral antidepressant therapy to kick in, and were then followed on the conventional therapy out to 90 days.
A between-group difference in MADRS total score in favor of the esketamine group was evident as early as 4 hours after the first dose and continued through day 25, the end of the double-blind treatment period, at which point 54% and 47% of the esketamine-plus-conventional-antidepressant groups in the two trials had achieved remission as defined by a MADRS score of 12 or less, as had about one-third of the control group.
The prespecified key secondary efficacy endpoint in ASPIRE-1 and -2 was change in the CGI-SS-R 24 hours after the first dose. Both the esketamine and placebo-treated patients experienced significant improvement in this domain, with a disappointing absence of between-group statistical significance.
“We think that this may be due to the effect of acute hospitalization in diffusing the suicidal crisis,” Dr. Canuso said.
She noted, however, that other suicidality indices did show significant improvement in the esketamine-treated group during assessments at 4 hours, 24 hours, and 25 days after the first dose. For example, the double-blind esketamine-treated patients were 2.62-fold more likely than controls to show a significant improvement in MADRS Suicidal Thoughts at 4 hours after dose number one, and 6.15 times more likely to do so 4 hours after their day-25 dose. The CGI structured physician assessments of suicide risk and frequency of suicidal thinking, as well as patient-reported frequency of suicidal thinking, showed consistent favorable numeric trends for improvement with esketamine, with odds ratios of 1.46-2.11 from 4 hours through 25 days, although those results generally failed to achieve statistical significance.
In terms of safety, the rate of serious adverse events was just under 12% in both the esketamine and placebo arms. As in earlier studies, the most common adverse events associated with the novel antidepressant were dizziness, dissociation, nausea, and sleepiness, all several-fold more frequent than with placebo.
Esketamine is the S-enantiomer of racemic ketamine. It’s a noncompetitive N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist.
Janssen, which already markets intranasal esketamine as Spravato in the United States for treatment-resistant depression, plans to file for an expanded indication on the basis of the ASPIRE-1 and -2 results. The Food and Drug Administration already has granted Breakthrough Therapy designation for research on esketamine for reduction of major depression symptoms in patients with active suicidal ideation.
The ASPIRE studies were funded by Janssen.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Statins may do double duty as antidepressants
COPENHAGEN – The tantalizing prospect that statins could be repurposed as adjunctive antidepressant drugs in a defined subgroup of patients with major depression is finally about to undergo rigorous testing.
Several lines of preliminary evidence, including large observational cohort studies as well as three small, short-duration randomized trials, suggest that this might indeed be the case. It’s an extremely attractive possibility, since patients and physicians wish that antidepressant therapy were more effective, statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide, and their safety profile is thoroughly established. The expectation is that a definitive answer as to whether repurposing of statins as antidepressants is worthwhile will be provided by the SIMCODE trial, recently approved for funding by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Christian Otte, MD, announced at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
SIMCODE is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial to be conducted at eight German academic medical centers. Participants, all of whom must have major depressive disorder and comorbid obesity, will be randomized to simvastatin or placebo on top of standard antidepressant therapy with escitalopram, an SSRI which, like simvastatin, is available as a relatively inexpensive generic, explained Dr. Otte, professor and vice director of the department of psychiatry and psychotherapy at Charite University in Berlin.
For Dr. Otte, SIMCODE will close a circle he helped open with his 2012 report from the Heart and Soul Study, a prospective longitudinal study of nearly 1,000 San Francisco Bay Area patients with coronary heart disease who were assessed annually for depressive symptoms for 6 years. The 65% of patients who were on statin therapy, albeit in nonrandomized fashion, had an adjusted 38% lower risk of developing depression (J Clin Psychiatry. 2012 May;73[5]:610-5).
His was one of seven observational studies involving more than 9,000 patients included in a subsequent meta-analysis showing that statin users were 37% less likely to develop depression than were nonusers (J Affect Disord. 2014 May;160:62-7).
All agreed that the verdict isn’t in yet as to statins’ effectiveness as adjunctive antidepressants, and that the subgroup of patients with major depression who are most likely to gain added antidepressive effect from a statin are those with what the speakers variously described as comorbid cardiometabolic disease, immunometabolic disease, or simply, as in SIMCODE, obesity. These are patients with a high degree of systemic inflammation, which often makes their depression less responsive to standard antidepressant therapies. The working hypothesis is that the pleiotropic anti-inflammatory effects of statins will result in a greater response to conventional antidepressants.
Animal studies point to multiple potential mechanisms by which statins might have antidepressant efficacy in clinical practice, according to Dr. Otte. Beyond their anti-inflammatory effects, these include the drugs’ documented effects on glutamatergic N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, dopamine receptors, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, glucocorticoid receptors, and hippocampal serotonin 2A receptors.
Ole Kohler, MD, a psychiatrist at Aarhus (Denmark) University, presented highlights of his eye-popping population-based study of more than 872,000 Danes on an SSRI in 1997-2012, more than 113,000 of whom were on a concomitant statin. The key finding: During roughly 3 years of follow-up, the risk of contact with a psychiatric hospital for depression was 36% lower in the group on concomitant SSRI/statin therapy than in those not on a statin (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Aug 1;173[8]:807-15).
He was quick to observe that a study such as this is vulnerable to various forms of confounding. This risk can be mitigated to a considerable extent by careful propensity score matching. Of note, however, none of the three studies that have been conducted with propensity score matching, including his own recent study of nearly 194,000 statin users and an equal number of matched nonusers, showed a difference in risk of depression between statin users and nonusers. All three studies were performed in general populations without known depression, leading Dr. Kohler to conclude that it’s unlikely that statins have a role in preventing depression in nondepressed individuals.
The focus should instead be on the possible role of statins in reducing the risk of depression in patients with cardiometabolic disease – that is, heart disease, metabolic syndrome, or type 2 diabetes – where more than a half-dozen cohort studies, including the Heart and Soul Study, have found that statins have a favorable impact, he added.
Estela Salagre, MD, a psychiatrist at the University of Barcelona, has carried out a meta-analysis of the three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of add-on statin therapy in patients on standard therapies for moderate to severe depression published to date. She found that statin therapy was associated with a 27% greater reduction in scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with placebo (J Affect Disord. 2016 Aug;200:235-42). Those findings recently were confirmed in a separate meta-analysis by other investigators using different methodologies (J Affect Disord. 2019 Oct 1;257:55-63).
Femke Lamers, PhD, presented evidence based on the nearly 3,000-subject longitudinal Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety that roughly one-quarter of individuals with major depressive disorder have a distinct subtype of nonmelancholic depression characterized by a clustering of obesity, inflammation, increased appetite, fatigue, hypersomnia, and increased levels of insulin and leptin. She calls it immunometabolic depression. She and her coinvestigators in the international Psychiatric Genomics Consortium have demonstrated that this phenotypic clustering is associated with a shared genetic vulnerability between major depression and obesity (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Dec 1;74[12]:1214-25).
“Major depressive disorder is not a one-size-fits-all disorder. There is an immunometabolic form of depression,” declared Dr. Lamers, an epidemiologist at the University of Amsterdam.
All speakers reported having no financial conflicts of interest.
COPENHAGEN – The tantalizing prospect that statins could be repurposed as adjunctive antidepressant drugs in a defined subgroup of patients with major depression is finally about to undergo rigorous testing.
Several lines of preliminary evidence, including large observational cohort studies as well as three small, short-duration randomized trials, suggest that this might indeed be the case. It’s an extremely attractive possibility, since patients and physicians wish that antidepressant therapy were more effective, statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide, and their safety profile is thoroughly established. The expectation is that a definitive answer as to whether repurposing of statins as antidepressants is worthwhile will be provided by the SIMCODE trial, recently approved for funding by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Christian Otte, MD, announced at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
SIMCODE is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial to be conducted at eight German academic medical centers. Participants, all of whom must have major depressive disorder and comorbid obesity, will be randomized to simvastatin or placebo on top of standard antidepressant therapy with escitalopram, an SSRI which, like simvastatin, is available as a relatively inexpensive generic, explained Dr. Otte, professor and vice director of the department of psychiatry and psychotherapy at Charite University in Berlin.
For Dr. Otte, SIMCODE will close a circle he helped open with his 2012 report from the Heart and Soul Study, a prospective longitudinal study of nearly 1,000 San Francisco Bay Area patients with coronary heart disease who were assessed annually for depressive symptoms for 6 years. The 65% of patients who were on statin therapy, albeit in nonrandomized fashion, had an adjusted 38% lower risk of developing depression (J Clin Psychiatry. 2012 May;73[5]:610-5).
His was one of seven observational studies involving more than 9,000 patients included in a subsequent meta-analysis showing that statin users were 37% less likely to develop depression than were nonusers (J Affect Disord. 2014 May;160:62-7).
All agreed that the verdict isn’t in yet as to statins’ effectiveness as adjunctive antidepressants, and that the subgroup of patients with major depression who are most likely to gain added antidepressive effect from a statin are those with what the speakers variously described as comorbid cardiometabolic disease, immunometabolic disease, or simply, as in SIMCODE, obesity. These are patients with a high degree of systemic inflammation, which often makes their depression less responsive to standard antidepressant therapies. The working hypothesis is that the pleiotropic anti-inflammatory effects of statins will result in a greater response to conventional antidepressants.
Animal studies point to multiple potential mechanisms by which statins might have antidepressant efficacy in clinical practice, according to Dr. Otte. Beyond their anti-inflammatory effects, these include the drugs’ documented effects on glutamatergic N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, dopamine receptors, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, glucocorticoid receptors, and hippocampal serotonin 2A receptors.
Ole Kohler, MD, a psychiatrist at Aarhus (Denmark) University, presented highlights of his eye-popping population-based study of more than 872,000 Danes on an SSRI in 1997-2012, more than 113,000 of whom were on a concomitant statin. The key finding: During roughly 3 years of follow-up, the risk of contact with a psychiatric hospital for depression was 36% lower in the group on concomitant SSRI/statin therapy than in those not on a statin (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Aug 1;173[8]:807-15).
He was quick to observe that a study such as this is vulnerable to various forms of confounding. This risk can be mitigated to a considerable extent by careful propensity score matching. Of note, however, none of the three studies that have been conducted with propensity score matching, including his own recent study of nearly 194,000 statin users and an equal number of matched nonusers, showed a difference in risk of depression between statin users and nonusers. All three studies were performed in general populations without known depression, leading Dr. Kohler to conclude that it’s unlikely that statins have a role in preventing depression in nondepressed individuals.
The focus should instead be on the possible role of statins in reducing the risk of depression in patients with cardiometabolic disease – that is, heart disease, metabolic syndrome, or type 2 diabetes – where more than a half-dozen cohort studies, including the Heart and Soul Study, have found that statins have a favorable impact, he added.
Estela Salagre, MD, a psychiatrist at the University of Barcelona, has carried out a meta-analysis of the three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of add-on statin therapy in patients on standard therapies for moderate to severe depression published to date. She found that statin therapy was associated with a 27% greater reduction in scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with placebo (J Affect Disord. 2016 Aug;200:235-42). Those findings recently were confirmed in a separate meta-analysis by other investigators using different methodologies (J Affect Disord. 2019 Oct 1;257:55-63).
Femke Lamers, PhD, presented evidence based on the nearly 3,000-subject longitudinal Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety that roughly one-quarter of individuals with major depressive disorder have a distinct subtype of nonmelancholic depression characterized by a clustering of obesity, inflammation, increased appetite, fatigue, hypersomnia, and increased levels of insulin and leptin. She calls it immunometabolic depression. She and her coinvestigators in the international Psychiatric Genomics Consortium have demonstrated that this phenotypic clustering is associated with a shared genetic vulnerability between major depression and obesity (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Dec 1;74[12]:1214-25).
“Major depressive disorder is not a one-size-fits-all disorder. There is an immunometabolic form of depression,” declared Dr. Lamers, an epidemiologist at the University of Amsterdam.
All speakers reported having no financial conflicts of interest.
COPENHAGEN – The tantalizing prospect that statins could be repurposed as adjunctive antidepressant drugs in a defined subgroup of patients with major depression is finally about to undergo rigorous testing.
Several lines of preliminary evidence, including large observational cohort studies as well as three small, short-duration randomized trials, suggest that this might indeed be the case. It’s an extremely attractive possibility, since patients and physicians wish that antidepressant therapy were more effective, statins are among the most widely prescribed drugs worldwide, and their safety profile is thoroughly established. The expectation is that a definitive answer as to whether repurposing of statins as antidepressants is worthwhile will be provided by the SIMCODE trial, recently approved for funding by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, Christian Otte, MD, announced at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
SIMCODE is a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled randomized trial to be conducted at eight German academic medical centers. Participants, all of whom must have major depressive disorder and comorbid obesity, will be randomized to simvastatin or placebo on top of standard antidepressant therapy with escitalopram, an SSRI which, like simvastatin, is available as a relatively inexpensive generic, explained Dr. Otte, professor and vice director of the department of psychiatry and psychotherapy at Charite University in Berlin.
For Dr. Otte, SIMCODE will close a circle he helped open with his 2012 report from the Heart and Soul Study, a prospective longitudinal study of nearly 1,000 San Francisco Bay Area patients with coronary heart disease who were assessed annually for depressive symptoms for 6 years. The 65% of patients who were on statin therapy, albeit in nonrandomized fashion, had an adjusted 38% lower risk of developing depression (J Clin Psychiatry. 2012 May;73[5]:610-5).
His was one of seven observational studies involving more than 9,000 patients included in a subsequent meta-analysis showing that statin users were 37% less likely to develop depression than were nonusers (J Affect Disord. 2014 May;160:62-7).
All agreed that the verdict isn’t in yet as to statins’ effectiveness as adjunctive antidepressants, and that the subgroup of patients with major depression who are most likely to gain added antidepressive effect from a statin are those with what the speakers variously described as comorbid cardiometabolic disease, immunometabolic disease, or simply, as in SIMCODE, obesity. These are patients with a high degree of systemic inflammation, which often makes their depression less responsive to standard antidepressant therapies. The working hypothesis is that the pleiotropic anti-inflammatory effects of statins will result in a greater response to conventional antidepressants.
Animal studies point to multiple potential mechanisms by which statins might have antidepressant efficacy in clinical practice, according to Dr. Otte. Beyond their anti-inflammatory effects, these include the drugs’ documented effects on glutamatergic N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors, dopamine receptors, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, glucocorticoid receptors, and hippocampal serotonin 2A receptors.
Ole Kohler, MD, a psychiatrist at Aarhus (Denmark) University, presented highlights of his eye-popping population-based study of more than 872,000 Danes on an SSRI in 1997-2012, more than 113,000 of whom were on a concomitant statin. The key finding: During roughly 3 years of follow-up, the risk of contact with a psychiatric hospital for depression was 36% lower in the group on concomitant SSRI/statin therapy than in those not on a statin (Am J Psychiatry. 2016 Aug 1;173[8]:807-15).
He was quick to observe that a study such as this is vulnerable to various forms of confounding. This risk can be mitigated to a considerable extent by careful propensity score matching. Of note, however, none of the three studies that have been conducted with propensity score matching, including his own recent study of nearly 194,000 statin users and an equal number of matched nonusers, showed a difference in risk of depression between statin users and nonusers. All three studies were performed in general populations without known depression, leading Dr. Kohler to conclude that it’s unlikely that statins have a role in preventing depression in nondepressed individuals.
The focus should instead be on the possible role of statins in reducing the risk of depression in patients with cardiometabolic disease – that is, heart disease, metabolic syndrome, or type 2 diabetes – where more than a half-dozen cohort studies, including the Heart and Soul Study, have found that statins have a favorable impact, he added.
Estela Salagre, MD, a psychiatrist at the University of Barcelona, has carried out a meta-analysis of the three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of add-on statin therapy in patients on standard therapies for moderate to severe depression published to date. She found that statin therapy was associated with a 27% greater reduction in scores on the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, compared with placebo (J Affect Disord. 2016 Aug;200:235-42). Those findings recently were confirmed in a separate meta-analysis by other investigators using different methodologies (J Affect Disord. 2019 Oct 1;257:55-63).
Femke Lamers, PhD, presented evidence based on the nearly 3,000-subject longitudinal Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety that roughly one-quarter of individuals with major depressive disorder have a distinct subtype of nonmelancholic depression characterized by a clustering of obesity, inflammation, increased appetite, fatigue, hypersomnia, and increased levels of insulin and leptin. She calls it immunometabolic depression. She and her coinvestigators in the international Psychiatric Genomics Consortium have demonstrated that this phenotypic clustering is associated with a shared genetic vulnerability between major depression and obesity (JAMA Psychiatry. 2017 Dec 1;74[12]:1214-25).
“Major depressive disorder is not a one-size-fits-all disorder. There is an immunometabolic form of depression,” declared Dr. Lamers, an epidemiologist at the University of Amsterdam.
All speakers reported having no financial conflicts of interest.
REPORTING FROM ECNP 2019
Oral drug for postpartum depression aces phase 3 trial
COPENHAGEN – A first-in-class, once-daily, orally administered neuroactive steroid known for now as SAGE-217 aced all of its primary and secondary outcomes for the treatment of postpartum depression in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ROBIN study, Eduard Vieta, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
“I think this changes the paradigm in the treatment of postpartum depression,” declared Dr. Vieta, professor of psychiatry and head of the bipolar disorders program at the University of Barcelona.
Like brexanolone (Zulresso), an intravenous formulation of allopregnanolone approved by the Food and Drug Administration in March 2019 as the first-ever drug specifically targeting postpartum depression, SAGE-217 is a positive allosteric modifier of synaptic and extrasynaptic GABA-A receptors. That differentiates the two drugs from benzodiazepines, which target only synaptic receptors. Both brexanolone and SAGE-217 are drugs developed by Sage Therapeutics. But SAGE-217, an investigational agent, is vastly more convenient to use than brexanolone since, as an oral drug, it doesn’t require hospitalization for intravenous administration.
Dr. Vieta ticked off five reasons why he considers SAGE-217 a game changer in the treatment of postpartum depression: “It’s an amazingly effective compound, with an effect size that’s bigger than we usually see with antidepressants. It has an early onset of action, similar to what we see with glutaminergic agents, although with an opposite mechanism: enhancing GABA rather than opposing glutamate. It has excellent tolerability, similar to placebo. It’s made to be used orally, a major advantage over other drugs that are available or close to becoming available, which have to be given IV. And last but not least, a patient will get it for only 2 weeks. The treatment can be stopped after 2 weeks, and there is long-term improvement.”
The ROBIN trial included 151 patients with postpartum depression as defined by a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 26 who were randomized double-blind to 14 days of SAGE-217 at 30 mg once daily or to placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in HAM-D scores between baseline and day 15. The key finding was that the SAGE-217 group averaged a 17.8-point reduction, significantly greater than the 13.6-point improvement with placebo. This advantage was maintained at assessment on day 45 – a full month after treatment stopped – with a 24.8-point improvement over baseline in the SAGE-217 recipients, compared with a 19-point reduction in controls. The advantage favoring SAGE-217 was significant as early as day 3, the first assessment, at which point the average improvement in HAM-D was 12.5 points, compared with 9.8 points in controls.
Other secondary endpoints included change from baseline to day 15 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS): a 22.8-point improvement in the SAGE-217 group, significantly greater than the 17.6-point improvement in the placebo arm. The same pattern was evident at day 45, with reductions in MADRS of 24.8 and 19 points, respectively, in the SAGE-217 and placebo groups.
Another key prespecified secondary endpoint was change in scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety through day 15. There was a mean 16.6-point drop in the active treatment arm, compared with a 12.7-point improvement with placebo, again a statistically significant and clinically meaningful between-group difference. This is an important endpoint because comorbid anxiety is common in the setting of postpartum depression, the psychiatrist continued.
The SAGE-217 group also demonstrated significantly higher rates of HAM-D response as defined by a 50% or greater reduction in total score at day 15, as well as in HAM-D remission, which entails having a score of 7 or less.
Treatment-emergent adverse events in the SAGE-217 and placebo arms were similar in frequency and type. The most common adverse events associated with SAGE-217 – all occurring in single-digit frequencies – were sleepiness, headache, dizziness, upper respiratory infections, and diarrhea. There was no signal of increased suicidal thoughts or behavior as assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale.
SAGE-217 also is the focus of an ongoing pivotal phase 3 trial in patients with major depression. In addition, the drug is under study for bipolar depression, major depressive disorder with comorbid insomnia, and generalized anxiety disorder.
Dr. Vieta reported serving on advisory boards for Sage Therapeutics, the study sponsor, as well as for two dozen other pharmaceutical companies. He receives research funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education, the Stanley Medical Research Institute, and more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
COPENHAGEN – A first-in-class, once-daily, orally administered neuroactive steroid known for now as SAGE-217 aced all of its primary and secondary outcomes for the treatment of postpartum depression in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ROBIN study, Eduard Vieta, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
“I think this changes the paradigm in the treatment of postpartum depression,” declared Dr. Vieta, professor of psychiatry and head of the bipolar disorders program at the University of Barcelona.
Like brexanolone (Zulresso), an intravenous formulation of allopregnanolone approved by the Food and Drug Administration in March 2019 as the first-ever drug specifically targeting postpartum depression, SAGE-217 is a positive allosteric modifier of synaptic and extrasynaptic GABA-A receptors. That differentiates the two drugs from benzodiazepines, which target only synaptic receptors. Both brexanolone and SAGE-217 are drugs developed by Sage Therapeutics. But SAGE-217, an investigational agent, is vastly more convenient to use than brexanolone since, as an oral drug, it doesn’t require hospitalization for intravenous administration.
Dr. Vieta ticked off five reasons why he considers SAGE-217 a game changer in the treatment of postpartum depression: “It’s an amazingly effective compound, with an effect size that’s bigger than we usually see with antidepressants. It has an early onset of action, similar to what we see with glutaminergic agents, although with an opposite mechanism: enhancing GABA rather than opposing glutamate. It has excellent tolerability, similar to placebo. It’s made to be used orally, a major advantage over other drugs that are available or close to becoming available, which have to be given IV. And last but not least, a patient will get it for only 2 weeks. The treatment can be stopped after 2 weeks, and there is long-term improvement.”
The ROBIN trial included 151 patients with postpartum depression as defined by a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 26 who were randomized double-blind to 14 days of SAGE-217 at 30 mg once daily or to placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in HAM-D scores between baseline and day 15. The key finding was that the SAGE-217 group averaged a 17.8-point reduction, significantly greater than the 13.6-point improvement with placebo. This advantage was maintained at assessment on day 45 – a full month after treatment stopped – with a 24.8-point improvement over baseline in the SAGE-217 recipients, compared with a 19-point reduction in controls. The advantage favoring SAGE-217 was significant as early as day 3, the first assessment, at which point the average improvement in HAM-D was 12.5 points, compared with 9.8 points in controls.
Other secondary endpoints included change from baseline to day 15 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS): a 22.8-point improvement in the SAGE-217 group, significantly greater than the 17.6-point improvement in the placebo arm. The same pattern was evident at day 45, with reductions in MADRS of 24.8 and 19 points, respectively, in the SAGE-217 and placebo groups.
Another key prespecified secondary endpoint was change in scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety through day 15. There was a mean 16.6-point drop in the active treatment arm, compared with a 12.7-point improvement with placebo, again a statistically significant and clinically meaningful between-group difference. This is an important endpoint because comorbid anxiety is common in the setting of postpartum depression, the psychiatrist continued.
The SAGE-217 group also demonstrated significantly higher rates of HAM-D response as defined by a 50% or greater reduction in total score at day 15, as well as in HAM-D remission, which entails having a score of 7 or less.
Treatment-emergent adverse events in the SAGE-217 and placebo arms were similar in frequency and type. The most common adverse events associated with SAGE-217 – all occurring in single-digit frequencies – were sleepiness, headache, dizziness, upper respiratory infections, and diarrhea. There was no signal of increased suicidal thoughts or behavior as assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale.
SAGE-217 also is the focus of an ongoing pivotal phase 3 trial in patients with major depression. In addition, the drug is under study for bipolar depression, major depressive disorder with comorbid insomnia, and generalized anxiety disorder.
Dr. Vieta reported serving on advisory boards for Sage Therapeutics, the study sponsor, as well as for two dozen other pharmaceutical companies. He receives research funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education, the Stanley Medical Research Institute, and more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
COPENHAGEN – A first-in-class, once-daily, orally administered neuroactive steroid known for now as SAGE-217 aced all of its primary and secondary outcomes for the treatment of postpartum depression in the phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled ROBIN study, Eduard Vieta, MD, PhD, said at the annual congress of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology.
“I think this changes the paradigm in the treatment of postpartum depression,” declared Dr. Vieta, professor of psychiatry and head of the bipolar disorders program at the University of Barcelona.
Like brexanolone (Zulresso), an intravenous formulation of allopregnanolone approved by the Food and Drug Administration in March 2019 as the first-ever drug specifically targeting postpartum depression, SAGE-217 is a positive allosteric modifier of synaptic and extrasynaptic GABA-A receptors. That differentiates the two drugs from benzodiazepines, which target only synaptic receptors. Both brexanolone and SAGE-217 are drugs developed by Sage Therapeutics. But SAGE-217, an investigational agent, is vastly more convenient to use than brexanolone since, as an oral drug, it doesn’t require hospitalization for intravenous administration.
Dr. Vieta ticked off five reasons why he considers SAGE-217 a game changer in the treatment of postpartum depression: “It’s an amazingly effective compound, with an effect size that’s bigger than we usually see with antidepressants. It has an early onset of action, similar to what we see with glutaminergic agents, although with an opposite mechanism: enhancing GABA rather than opposing glutamate. It has excellent tolerability, similar to placebo. It’s made to be used orally, a major advantage over other drugs that are available or close to becoming available, which have to be given IV. And last but not least, a patient will get it for only 2 weeks. The treatment can be stopped after 2 weeks, and there is long-term improvement.”
The ROBIN trial included 151 patients with postpartum depression as defined by a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) score of at least 26 who were randomized double-blind to 14 days of SAGE-217 at 30 mg once daily or to placebo. The primary endpoint was the change in HAM-D scores between baseline and day 15. The key finding was that the SAGE-217 group averaged a 17.8-point reduction, significantly greater than the 13.6-point improvement with placebo. This advantage was maintained at assessment on day 45 – a full month after treatment stopped – with a 24.8-point improvement over baseline in the SAGE-217 recipients, compared with a 19-point reduction in controls. The advantage favoring SAGE-217 was significant as early as day 3, the first assessment, at which point the average improvement in HAM-D was 12.5 points, compared with 9.8 points in controls.
Other secondary endpoints included change from baseline to day 15 on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS): a 22.8-point improvement in the SAGE-217 group, significantly greater than the 17.6-point improvement in the placebo arm. The same pattern was evident at day 45, with reductions in MADRS of 24.8 and 19 points, respectively, in the SAGE-217 and placebo groups.
Another key prespecified secondary endpoint was change in scores on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety through day 15. There was a mean 16.6-point drop in the active treatment arm, compared with a 12.7-point improvement with placebo, again a statistically significant and clinically meaningful between-group difference. This is an important endpoint because comorbid anxiety is common in the setting of postpartum depression, the psychiatrist continued.
The SAGE-217 group also demonstrated significantly higher rates of HAM-D response as defined by a 50% or greater reduction in total score at day 15, as well as in HAM-D remission, which entails having a score of 7 or less.
Treatment-emergent adverse events in the SAGE-217 and placebo arms were similar in frequency and type. The most common adverse events associated with SAGE-217 – all occurring in single-digit frequencies – were sleepiness, headache, dizziness, upper respiratory infections, and diarrhea. There was no signal of increased suicidal thoughts or behavior as assessed using the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale.
SAGE-217 also is the focus of an ongoing pivotal phase 3 trial in patients with major depression. In addition, the drug is under study for bipolar depression, major depressive disorder with comorbid insomnia, and generalized anxiety disorder.
Dr. Vieta reported serving on advisory boards for Sage Therapeutics, the study sponsor, as well as for two dozen other pharmaceutical companies. He receives research funding from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Education, the Stanley Medical Research Institute, and more than a dozen pharmaceutical companies.
REPORTING FROM THE ECNP 2019