Search

IntroductionPatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) often have inadequate response to antidepressant treatment (ADT) requiring augmentation with other treatments. Cariprazine is a D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist approved to treat schizophrenia and manic, mixed, and depressive episodes of bipolar I disorder. The efficacy of cariprazine as an adjunctive treatment for patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT alone has been evaluated in phase 2/3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. Post hoc analyses of one phase 3 trial (NCT03738215) evaluated cariprazine + ADT for improving depressive symptoms in subgroups of patients categorized by 1) the level of response to ongoing ADT at baseline and 2) the number of ADTs associated with inadequate response during the current episode.MethodsPatients were randomized to placebo + ADT (n=254), cariprazine 1.5 mg/d + ADT (n=252), or cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT (n=253) for 6 weeks of double-blind treatment. Post hoc analyses evaluated change from baseline to week 6 in MADRS total score in subgroups of patients who had ≥25%–ResultsAt baseline, 65.1% (n=486) of patients had an ADT response level between 25%–ConclusionsIn these post hoc analyses, cariprazine + ADT was associated with greater reductions in MADRS total score versus placebo regardless of the level of response to ongoing ADT at baseline or number of prior ADT failures in the current episode.FundingAbbVie

Study Objectives:Sexual dysfunction occurs in 40%-60% of patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), due to either the illness itself and/or the effects of antidepressant treatment. The phase-2 CLARITY trial recently demonstrated the efficacy of adjunctive pimavanserin (PIM) for MDD when added to ongoing selective serotonin or serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SSRI/SNRI) treatment. No new safety observations were reported in this study. This post-hoc analysis examines the potential impact of PIM treatment on sexual function.Method:Study methodology has been presented previously (APA 2019). Adult male and female patients with moderate-to-severe MDD were randomized to PIM 34 mg/day (n=51) or placebo (PBO, n=152) added to ongoing SSRI/SNRI treatment. Massachusetts General Hospital–Sexual Functioning Inventory (MGH-SFI) and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, 17-item version (HAMD-17) item 14 (sexual interest) scores were examined by analysis of covariance.Results:Adjunctive PIM resulted in significantly greater 5-week reduction (improvement) relative to SSRI/SNRI treatment plus placebo on mean MGH-SFI scores (difference –0.634, SE 0.167; PConclusions:These results underscore the potential of adjunctive PIM for improving sexual function in patients with MDD and inadequate response to SSRIs/SNRIs. Potential benefits should be confirmed in further studies.Funding Acknowledgements:ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Study Objectives:Depression is the leading cause of disability worldwide, with fewer than 50% of treated patients achieving full remission. This study (“CLARITY,” ACP-103-042: NCT03018340) examined the 5-HT2A inverse agonist pimavanserin (PIM) as a potential adjunctive treatment for major depressive disorder (MDD).Method:Adult female and male subjects with a DSM-5 primary diagnosis of a major depressive episode as part of MDD, inadequate response to ongoing SSRIs or SNRIs of adequate dose and duration as confirmed by the Massachusetts General Hospital Antidepressant Treatment History Questionnaire, and a MADRS total score >20 were randomized to PIM 34 mg/day or placebo (PBO) added to their SSRI/SNRI treatment. A sequential parallel comparison design was used, consisting of two 5-week stages. PBO nonresponders in Stage-1 who met prespecified criteria were re-randomized to PIM or PBO for the second period (Stage-2). The primary efficacy measure was the weighted average of Stage-1 and Stage-2 total scores of the HAMD-17.Results:Of the 207 patients enrolled, 52 received PIM, and 155 received PBO in Stage 1. Mean age was 46.2 years, and 72.9% of patients were female. Baseline MADRS total (mean [SD]: 31.5 [0.4]) and HAMD-17 total scores (22.2 [0.3]) indicated a moderate overall severity of illness. PIM met the primary endpoint, reducing the weighted Stage-1/Stage-2 HAMD-17 total score relative to PBO (least-square means [LSM] difference, –1.7; standard error [SE], 0.9; P=0.04). Stage-1 PIM patients demonstrated highly significant 5-week improvement on the HAMD-17 (LSM difference=–4.0, SE=1.1; PConclusions:Study data provide evidence of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of adjunctive PIM in treating MDD inadequately responsive to SSRI or SNRI therapy. Efforts to confirm these results are ongoing in a Phase 3 program.Funding Acknowledgements:ACADIA Pharmaceuticals Inc.

Objective/Introduction: We sought to characterize the impact of the 90-item Symptom Checklist (SCL-90) subscales for paranoid ideation (PI) and psychoticism (P) in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD), on acute anti-depressant response and on relapse prevention.Methods: Subjects with Structured Clinical Interview for DSM Disorders-diagnosed non-psychotic MDD were recruited into a clinical trial of open-label fluoxetine 10–60 mg/day for 12 weeks, followed by double-blind randomization of responders (n=262) to fluoxetine continuation or placebo for 12 months. PI and P were assessed with the patient-rated SCL-90. The association of these symptoms with response to treatment was assessed by logistic regression.Results: We found significant decreases in PI and P during acute treatment phase for fluoxetine responders and nonresponders, although only 10.3% and 7.5% of patients experienced a ≥50% reduction in PI and P scores, respectively. Neither PI nor P scores significantly predicted time to relapse. P scores predicted a lower response rate to treatment with fluoxetine.Discussion: The results of the present study suggest that there is a significant relationship between the presence of psychoticism in patients with nonpsychotic MDD, and the likelihood of overall depressive symptom improvement following a trial of monotherapy with fluoxetine.Conclusion: An increased burden of psychoticism in depressed subjects may confer poorer response to fluoxetine, but not increased risk of relapse among fluoxetine responders.

Background: Inadequate response to antidepressant monotherapy in women with major depressive disorder is common. Testosterone administration has been shown to be an effective augmentation therapy in depressed hypogonadal men with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor-resistant depression. However, the effects of low-dose testosterone as augmentation therapy in women with treatment-resistant depression have not been studied.Methods: Low-dose transdermal testosterone (300 mcg/day, Intrinsa, Procter and Gamble Pharmaceuticals) was administered to nine women with treatment-resistant depression in an 8 week open-label pilot protocol.Results: There was a statistically significant improvement in mean Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores at 2 weeks, sustained through the 8 week period. Two-thirds of subjects achieved a response to the treatment (decrease in MADRS score of ≥50%) and 33% achieved remission (final MADRS score Conclusion: These preliminary pilot data suggest that low-dose transdermal testosterone may be an effective augmentation therapy in women with treatment-resistant depression. Further studies are warranted.

Introduction: Recent data suggest that escitalopram may be more effective in severe depression than other selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.Methods: Individual patient data from four randomized, double-blind comparative trials of escitalopram versus a serotonin/norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) (two trials with duloxetine and two with venlafaxine extended release) in outpatients (18–85 years of age) with moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder were pooled. The primary efficacy parameter in all four trials was mean change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score.Results: Significantly fewer escitalopram (82/524) than SNRI (114/527) patients prematurely withdrew from treatment due to all causes (15.6% vs. 21.6%, Fisher Exact: P=.014) and adverse events (5.3% vs. 12.0%, Fisher Exact: P P P Conclusion: This pooled analysis indicates that escitalopram is at least as effective as the SNRIs (venlafaxine XR and duloxetine), even in severe depression, and escitalopram treatment was better tolerated.

Antidepressants have been available since the 1950s, when the monoamine oxidase inhibitors were first discovered. Since then, our armamentarium of antidepressants has progressively expanded with the discovery of the tricyclic antidepressants (TCAs) in the 1960s, the selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) in the 1980s, and, subsequently, the serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs), and other agents possessing a diverse mechanism of action including buproprion, and mirtazapine.

There is mounting evidence to suggest that the efficacy of all available antidepressants when used as monotherapy to treat major depressive disorder (MDD) is, at best, modest. For example, a meta-analysis of all double-blind placebo-controlled studies of antidepressants published since 1980 revealed response rates of 53% for antidepressants versus 36% for placebo (difference in response rate of 16.8%) (Slide 1). To make matters worse, if one is to assume that “negative trials” (ie, trials which do not demonstrate the superiority of a drug over placebo) are less likely to be published than “positive trials” (trials which demonstrate the superiority of a drug versus placebo), it is quite possible that the margin of efficacy of antidepressants when compared to placebo is ≤16.8%. Thus, if one were to include all unpublished along with published double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants for MDD, this efficacy margin could be ≤10%.

ObjectiveTo examine the prevalence of the C677T polymorphism of the methylene tetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) gene and the A2756G polymorphism of methionine synthase (MS), and their impact on antidepressant response.MethodsWe screened 224 subjects (52% female, mean age 39 ± 11 years) with SCID-diagnosed major depressive disorder (MDD), and obtained 194 genetic samples. 49 subjects (49% female, mean age 36 ± 11 years) participated in a 12-week open clinical trial of fluoxetine 20–60 mg/day. Association between clinical response and C677T and A2756G polymorphisms, folate, B12, and homocysteine was examined.ResultsPrevalence of the C677T and A2756G polymorphisms was consistent with previous reports (C/C = 41%, C/T = 47%, T/T = 11%, A/A = 66%, A/G = 29%, G/G = 4%). In the fluoxetine-treated subsample (n = 49), intent-to-treat (ITT) response rates were 47% for C/C subjects and 46% for pooled C/T and T/T subjects (nonsignificant). ITT response rates were 38% for A/A subjects and 60% for A/G subjects (nonsignificant), with no subjects exhibiting the G/G homozygote. Mean baseline plasma B12 was significantly lower in A/G subjects compared to A/A, but folate and homocysteine levels were not affected by genetic status. Plasma folate was negatively associated with treatment response.ConclusionThe C677T and A2756G polymorphisms did not significantly affect antidepressant response. These preliminary findings require replication in larger samples.