Dataset Information

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE.:Mixed presentations, defined by simultaneous occurrence of depressive and manic symptoms, are difficult to treat. Antidepressants, although commonly used, have weak evidence of efficacy and may increase risk of mood destabilization. The aim of this pooled post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of bipolar depression with or without concurrent manic symptoms. METHODS.:Patients from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies who met DSM-IV-TR or DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder with a current major depressive episode were identified to have concurrent manic symptoms by baseline Young Mania Rating Scale total score ?4. Efficacy was assessed in cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day dose groups versus placebo; analyses included the least squares mean change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. RESULTS.:Of 1383 patients randomized to treatment, 808 (58.4%) had concurrent manic symptoms. For patients with manic symptoms, mean reduction in MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 was significantly greater for both cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day compared with placebo, with least squares mean differences (LSMDs) versus placebo of -2.5 (p = .0033) and -2.9 (p = .0010), respectively; for patients without manic symptoms, the LSMD was significant for 1.5 mg/day (-3.3; p = .0008), but not for 3 mg/day (-1.9; p = .0562). CONCLUSION.:The results of this post hoc analysis suggest that cariprazine may be an appropriate treatment option for patients with bipolar I depression with or without manic symptoms, with higher doses potentially more effective in patients with manic symptoms.

SUBMITTER: McIntyre RS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7511904 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

McIntyre Roger S RS Suppes Trisha T Earley Willie W Patel Mehul M Stahl Stephen M SM

CNS spectrums 20191002 4

<h4>Objective</h4>Mixed presentations, defined by simultaneous occurrence of depressive and manic symptoms, are difficult to treat. Antidepressants, although commonly used, have weak evidence of efficacy and may increase risk of mood destabilization. The aim of this pooled post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of bipolar depression with or without concurrent manic symptoms.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studie ...[more]

PMID: 31576791

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDepending on the classification system used, 5-40% of manic subjects present with concomitant depressive symptoms. This post-hoc analysis evaluates the hypothesis that (hypo)manic subjects have a higher burden of depression than non-(hypo)manic subjects.MethodsData from 806 Bipolar I or II participants of the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network (SFBN) were analyzed, comprising 17,937 visits. A split data approach was used to separate evaluation and verification in independent samples. For verification of our hypotheses, we compared mean IDS-C scores ratings of non-manic, hypomanic and manic patients. Data were stored on an SQL-server and extracted using standard SQL functions. Linear correlation coefficients and pivotal tables were used to characterize patient groups.ResultsMean age of participants was 40 ± 12 years (range 18-81). 460 patients (57.1%) were female and 624 were diagnosed as having bipolar I disorder (77.4%) and 182 with bipolar II (22.6%). Data of 17,937 visits were available for analyses, split into odd and even patient numbers and stratified into three groups by YMRS-scores: not manic < 12, hypomanic < 21, manic < 30. Average IDS-C sum scores in manic or hypomanic states were significantly higher (p < .001) than for non-manic states. (Hypo)manic female patients were likely to show more depressive symptoms than males (p < .001). Similar results were obtained when only the core items of the YMRS or only the number of depressive symptoms were considered. Analyzing the frequency of (hypo)manic mixed states applying a proxy of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier extracted from the IDS-C, we found that almost 50% of the (hypo)manic group visits fulfilled DSM-5 mixed features specifier criteria.ConclusionSubjects with a higher manic symptom load are also significantly more likely to experience a higher number of depressive symptoms. Mania and depression are not opposing poles of bipolarity but complement each other.

Project description:BackgroundAsenapine demonstrated superiority over placebo for mania in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute current manic or mixed episodes in 2 randomized, placebo-and olanzapine-controlled trials. We report the results of exploratory pooled post hoc analyses from these trials evaluating asenapine's effects on depressive symptoms in patients from these trials with significant baseline depressive symptoms.MethodsIn the original trials (A7501004 [NCT00159744], A7501005 [NCT00159796]), 977 patients were randomized to flexible-dose sublingual asenapine (10 mg twice daily on day 1; 5 or 10 mg twice daily thereafter), placebo, or oral olanzapine 5-20 mg once daily for 3 weeks. Three populations were defined using baseline depressive symptoms: (1) Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥20 (n = 132); (2) Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder-Depression (CGI-BP-D) scale severity score ≥4 (n = 170); (3) diagnosis of mixed episodes (n = 302) by investigative site screening. For each population, asenapine and olanzapine were independently compared with placebo using least squares mean change from baseline on depressive symptom measures.ResultsDecreases in MADRS total score were statistically greater with asenapine versus placebo at days 7 and 21 in all populations; differences between olanzapine and placebo were not significant. Decreases in CGI-BP-D score were significantly greater with asenapine versus placebo at day 7 in all categories and day 21 in population 1; CGI-BP-D score reductions were significantly greater with olanzapine versus placebo at day 21 in population 1 and day 7 in populations 2 and 3.ConclusionsThese post hoc analyses show that asenapine reduced depressive symptoms in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute manic or mixed episodes with clinically relevant depressive symptoms at baseline; olanzapine results appeared to be less consistent. Controlled studies of asenapine in patients with acute bipolar depression are necessary to confirm the generalizability of these findings.

Project description:Abstract Background: Relapse is common in schizophrenia; identifying characteristics associated with relapse may help improve disease management. Cariprazine, a D3/D2 receptor partial agonist, is approved in the United States for the treatment of schizophrenia. Post hoc analyses of a long-term, randomized, double-blind (up to 72 weeks), relapse prevention trial (NCT01412060) were performed to identify characteristics associated with relapse in placebo- and cariprazine-treated patients. Methods: Baseline characteristics in cariprazine-treated (3, 6, or 9?mg/d) or placebo-treated patients were evaluated in relation to relapse status. Demographic variables included age, sex, race, weight, and BMI. Psychiatric history variables included mean age at illness onset, duration of schizophrenia, duration of current episode, number of lifetime psychotic episodes, previous hospitalizations, and acute exacerbations in the past year. Baseline rating scale severity scores (eg, Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale [PANSS] and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity [CGI-S]) were evaluated. Differences in demographic and psychiatric history variables were evaluated using the Student t test (categorical variables) or Fisher exact test (continuous variables); rating scale severity scores were evaluated with 2-way ANOVA with relapse and study center as factors. Results: Relapse occurred in nearly twice as many placebo-treated (47.5%) as cariprazine-treated patients (24.8%) (hazard ratio [95% CI] = 0.45 [0.28, 0.73]). For cariprazine-treated patients who relapsed vs those who did not, significant differences were seen in baseline age (mean, 43 vs 38 y), weight (85 vs 73?kg), BMI (29 vs 26?kg/m2), and race (all, P < .05); for placebo-treated patients, there were no significant differences in demographic variables based on relapse status. In both treatment groups, patients who relapsed vs patients who did not relapse had a greater mean number of previous hospitalizations (cariprazine = 8.4 vs 4.3 [P = .0199]; placebo = 4.9 vs 2.8 [P = .0183]). Cariprazine patients who relapsed vs those who did not had longer illness duration (18.1 y vs 9.9 [P = .0005]); the number of lifetime episodes also differed by relapse status (P = .0016), with a greater percentage of relapsed patients experiencing ?5 episodes. Baseline PANSS total score and CGI-S scores were not significantly different in relapsed vs nonrelapsed patients in either treatment group. Conclusion: While patients treated with cariprazine had a lower rate of relapse than placebo overall, the results suggest that patients who were older, heavier, or had a later stage of illness may be more prone to relapse during cariprazine treatment. In patients randomized to placebo, demographic characteristics and psychiatric history were not as meaningful in predicting relapse. Greater symptom severity at baseline did not appear to be associated with relapse.

Project description:Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of children and adolescents with bipolar depression presenting with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features. Methods: Patients, 10-17 years of age, with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-5), diagnosis of bipolar I depression were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with once-daily flexible doses of lurasidone 20-80 mg or placebo. The presence of mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features in this pediatric bipolar depression trial was defined as a Young Mania Rating Scale score of 5 or greater at study baseline. Key efficacy measures included change from baseline to week 6 in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score (primary endpoint) and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Severity (CGI-BP-S) score, using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis. Results: At baseline, subsyndromal hypomanic features were present in 54.2% of patients. Treatment with lurasidone (vs. placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in CDRS-R scores at week 6, independent of the presence (-21.5 vs. -15.9, p < 0.01; effect size d = 0.43) or absence (-20.5 vs. -14.9, p < 0.01; d = 0.44) of subsyndromal hypomanic features. Likewise, lurasidone (vs. placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in CGI-BP-S scores at week 6, independent of the presence (-1.6 vs. -1.1, p < 0.001, d = 0.51) or absence (-1.3 vs. -1.0, p = 0.05; d = 0.31) of these subsyndromal hypomanic features. Rates of protocol-defined treatment-emergent hypomania or mania were similar for lurasidone and placebo in patients with (lurasidone 8.2% vs. placebo 9.0%) or without subsyndromal hypomanic features (lurasidone 1.3% vs. placebo 3.7%). Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial, lurasidone was found to be efficacious in the treatment of child and adolescent patients with bipolar depression who presented with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features. No differences in safety profile, including the risk of treatment-emergent mania, were observed in patients with or without subsyndromal hypomanic features in this study.

Project description:Introduction In the early stage of schizophrenia (first 5 years), the most important clinical target besides symptom control is relapse prevention as each relapse significantly decreases the possibility of preferable long-term outcomes. Early discontinuation of antipsychotic medication due to intolerable side-effects is one of the most common causes of relapse. Objectives This poster aims to present cariprazine’s tolerability in the early stage of schizophrenia. Methods Data from 4 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials (NCT00404573, NCT01104766, NCT01104779, NCT00694707) with similar design (1 week of wash out period, 6 weeks of treatment and 2-4 weeks of follow-up) were pooled. For the post-hoc analysis, patients with early stage of schizophrenia (defined as having a disease duration of less than 5 years) were extracted from the whole safety population, and approved doses of cariprazine (1.5-6.0 mg/day) were combined. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and discontinuation rates were analysed versus placebo. Results Overall, 169 placebo- (PBO) and 322 cariprazine-treated (CAR) patients were identified as having schizophrenia for less than 5 years. 67.7% cariprazine- and 56.2% placebo-treated patients reported at least one TEAE; most frequently insomnia (10.9 % CAR; 12.4% PBO), akathisia (9.6% CAR; 2.4% PBO) and extrapyramidal symptoms (9.3% CAR; 1.8% PBO). Discontinuation due to adverse events was reported in only 8.4% of cariprazine- and 14.8% of placebo-treated patients. Relapse occurred in 3.1% of cariprazine- and 5.3% of placebo-treated patients. Conclusions Cariprazine was generally well-tolerated in the early stage of schizophrenia; given the limitations of this analysis, additional research is warranted. Conflict of interest Studies were funded by Gedeon Richter Plc. and Allergan Plc (prior to its acquisition by AbbVie). Dombi, Acsai, Dr. Barabássy, Dr. Sebe, Dr. Laszlovszky, Dr Vass, Dr. Szatmári and Dr. Németh are employees of Gedeon Richter Plc., Dr. Earley and Dr. Patel a

Project description:BACKGROUND:Some, but not all, prior investigations suggest armodafinil may have utility as an adjunctive treatment in bipolar I depression. METHODS:Multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in patients aged 18 to 65 years experiencing a depressive episode despite maintenance therapy for bipolar I disorder. Patients were randomized to receive adjunctive armodafinil 150 mg/day or adjunctive placebo for 8 weeks. Primary efficacy outcome was change from baseline in 30-Item Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated (IDS-C30) total score at week 8. Safety and tolerability were monitored. RESULTS:Of 656 patients screened, 399 were randomized, of whom 308 (77 %) were taking a protocol-allowed mood stabilizer as monotherapy. The primary efficacy outcome did not reach statistical significance; however, several secondary efficacy outcomes demonstrated statistically significant advantages for adjunctive armodafinil (n = 197) over adjunctive placebo (n = 196), including Clinical Global Impression of Severity of Illness for depression (weeks 6, 8, and endpoint; all P < 0.05), Global Assessment of Functioning (weeks 4, 8, and endpoint; all P < 0.02), IDS-C30 remitter rates (week 8 and endpoint; both P < 0.02), and mean change from baseline in IDS-C30 total score at week 7 (P < 0.05). Adjunctive armodafinil and adjunctive placebo were generally well tolerated. Although adjunctive armodafinil compared with adjunctive placebo yielded a higher headache rate (15 vs 8 %), it yielded similar (generally favorably low) rates of all-cause discontinuation (16 vs 16 %), adverse event discontinuation (4 vs 5 %), nausea (6 vs 4 %), ≥7 % weight gain (2 vs 5 %), anxiety (4 vs 3 %), insomnia (3 vs 2 %), sedation/somnolence (1 vs 1 %), and hypomania (0 vs <1 %). CONCLUSIONS:In this study, adjunctive armodafinil compared with adjunctive placebo in bipolar I depression did not separate in the primary efficacy outcome but demonstrated advantages for several secondary efficacy outcomes and was generally well tolerated. Additional research is warranted and necessary to better identify clinical predictors (e.g., atypical depressive symptoms, specific anti-manic/mood-stabilizing agents used) that would provide optimized, individualized therapeutics for bipolar depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01305408.

Project description:Background:Patient characteristics and disease progression may affect response to pharmacologic intervention in bipolar I disorder. Asenapine is approved for acute treatment of manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder in patients 10-17 years old. Post hoc analyses assessed asenapine efficacy in pediatric patients by current manic or mixed episode, number of lifetime episodes, and baseline body mass index (BMI). Patients and methods:Data were obtained from a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial of asenapine 2.5, 5.0, or 10.0 mg twice daily (BID) in male or female patients (10-17 years) with bipolar I disorder (NCT01244815). Patients were stratified by current episode type (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition - defined mixed/manic), number of lifetime episodes (<3, 3-5, >5), and baseline BMI tertile. Changes from baseline to day 21 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions Scale for use in Bipolar Illness (CGI-BP) were assessed in asenapine subgroups vs placebo. Results:In patients with mixed episodes, differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were statistically significant for each asenapine dose vs placebo (P<0.001) at day 21; in patients with manic episodes, significant differences vs placebo were seen in all groups (P<0.05) except 2.5 mg BID on the YMRS. In patients with <3 previous mixed/manic episodes, significant differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were observed for all asenapine doses vs placebo (P<0.05). In patients with 3-5 or >5 previous episodes, asenapine 10 mg BID was significantly different than placebo (P<0.05) on both scales; differences vs placebo varied for lower doses. Baseline body weight or BMI did not appear to influence the efficacy of asenapine. Conclusion:Asenapine was effective in the treatment of pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder. Efficacy did not appear to be influenced by the type of current episode, stage of disease progression, or baseline body weight/BMI.

Dataset Information

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

Publications

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets