Dataset Information

Efficacy and Safety of Seltorexant as Adjunctive Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder: A Phase 2b, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Adaptive Dose-Finding Study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Seltorexant, a selective antagonist of human orexin-2 receptors, demonstrated antidepressant effects in a previous exploratory study in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).

Methods

To replicate and extend this observation, a double-blind, adaptive dose-finding study was performed in patients with MDD who had an inadequate response to 1-3 selective serotonin/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors in the current episode. Patients were randomized (2:1:1) to placebo or seltorexant (20 mg or 40 mg) once-daily, administered adjunctively to the antidepressant the patient had been receiving at screening. After an interim analysis (6 weeks post-randomization of 160th patient), newly recruited patients randomly received (3:3:1) placebo or seltorexant 10 mg or 20 mg; the 40-mg dose was no longer assigned. Patients were stratified by baseline Insomnia Severity Index (ISI) scores (ISI ≥ 15 vs < 15). The primary endpoint was change from baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 6.

Results

Mixed-Model for Repeated Measures analysis showed a greater improvement in MADRS total score in the seltorexant 20-mg group vs placebo at weeks 3 and 6; least-square means difference (90% CI): -4.5 (-6.96; -2.07), P = .003; and -3.1 (-6.13; -0.16), P = .083, respectively. The improvement in MADRS score at week 6 for seltorexant 20 mg was greater in patients with baseline ISI ≥ 15 vs those with ISI < 15; least-square means difference (90% CI) vs placebo: -4.9 (-8.98; -0.80) and -0.7 (-5.16; 3.76), respectively. The most common (≥5%) adverse events with seltorexant were somnolence, headache, and nausea.

Conclusions

A clinically meaningful reduction of depressive symptoms was observed for seltorexant 20 mg. In the subset of patients with sleep disturbance (ISI ≥ 15), a larger treatment difference between seltorexant 20 mg and placebo was observed, warranting further investigation. No new safety signal was identified.

Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03227224.

Previous presentation

Poster presented at 58th Annual Meeting of American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP), December 8-11, 2019, Orlando, FL.

SUBMITTER: Savitz A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8653874 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivePatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with inadequate response to antidepressant treatment (ADT) may suffer a prolonged loss of functioning. This review aimed to determine if self-rated functional measures are informative in randomized placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT.MethodsThis was a systematic literature review of articles in any language from the MEDLINE database published between January 1990 and March 2017. Eligible studies met the following criteria: patients with MDD; inadequate response to at least one ADT; adjunctive therapy (pharmacological or otherwise) to ADT; placebo control group; randomized controlled trial or a post hoc analysis of a randomized controlled trial; reported a self-rated functioning scale. Study characteristics and functioning efficacy data were extracted.ResultsA total of 2,090 discrete records were screened, 293 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility, and 26 studies were included. All studies were acute (6-12 weeks) except for one 52-week study. The only self-rated functioning scale used in the included studies was the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Of the 13 adjunctive agents identified, aripiprazole, brexpiprazole, edivoxetine, and risperidone improved functioning versus placebo (p<0.05), as measured by the SDS total or mean score. On the SDS "work/studies" item, only aripiprazole had a statistically significant benefit, in one study out of four. Thus, where a benefit was observed on the SDS total or mean, this was generally driven by improvement on the "social life" and "family life" items. A limitation of the review is that it only considered published literature from one database.ConclusionThe SDS, a self-rated functional measure, is informative in acute randomized placebo-controlled studies of adjunctive therapy in patients with MDD and inadequate response to ADT. However, the item that measures work performance may be less relevant to this population than the items that measure social and family life.

Project description:BackgroundMajor depressive disorder (MDD) is a leading cause of disability worldwide. The current treatments are ineffective in approximately one-third of patients, resulting in a large economic burden and reduced quality of life for a significant proportion of the global population. There is considerable evidence that increased inflammation may distinguish a sub-type of MDD, and there are no validated diagnostic tools or treatments for neuroinflammation in MDD patients. The current study aims to explore the potential role of low-dose naltrexone (LDN), a drug with purported anti-inflammatory properties in the central nervous system, as an adjunctive treatment in patients with MDD.Methods/designThis double-blind placebo-controlled hybrid parallel arm study enables the exploration of peripheral and central inflammatory markers with LDN as an approach to investigate inflammation as a pathophysiological contributor to MDD. Eligible participants with MDD (n = 48) will be stratified into the high and low inflammatory groups according to the levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) and then randomized to receive LDN or placebo for an initial 12 weeks, followed by a further 12 weeks during which all participants will receive LDN. The primary outcome measure will be the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) administered at baseline, 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 8 weeks, 12 weeks, 14 weeks, 16 weeks, 20 weeks, and 24 weeks, to assess the effectiveness of the anti-depressant response. The secondary outcomes include the use of MRI techniques including quantitative magnetization transfer (qMT), echo-planar spectroscopic imaging (EPSI), and diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) to help to elucidate the neurobiological mechanism of LDN, and the inflammatory mechanisms in action in MDD. Electroencephalography, blood samples, cognitive tasks, and additional questionnaires will also be used to determine if there is a specific profile of symptoms in individuals with inflammatory MDD. Healthy participants (n = 24) will be recruited for baseline outcome measures only, to enable comparison with patients with MDD.DiscussionThis trial contributes to the literature on inflammation in MDD, including the understanding of the pathophysiology and efficacy of anti-inflammatory treatments. The investigation of inflammatory mechanisms in MDD is an important first step in the development of biomarkers to classify patient sub-groups, increase the accuracy of diagnosis, and tailor the approach to patients in clinical practice. This study may provide evidence of the benefit of LDN for the groups in whom conventional anti-depressants are ineffective and lead the way for translation into clinical practice.Trial registrationAustralian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry ACTRN12622000881730 . Registered on 21 June 2022.

Project description:ObjectiveEpisodes of major depressive disorder (MDD) characterized by high levels of anxiety symptoms are less likely to respond to some forms of antidepressant treatment (ADT). This report examines the effects of adjunctive brexpiprazole on depressive symptoms among patients with MDD and anxiety symptoms.Materials and methodsThis was a post hoc analysis of 1,171 patients from the 6-week, randomized, double-blind phases of three studies in adults with MDD and inadequate response to ADTs (NCT01360645, NCT01360632, NCT02196506). Data were pooled for brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day and for placebo (adjunct to ADT). Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale Total score changes were assessed in subgroups of patients with and without anxious distress (based on proxies for the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition criteria) and anxious depression (defined as a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale Anxiety/somatization factor score of ?7). Safety was assessed by the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs).ResultsBenefits were seen for adjunctive brexpiprazole (compared with adjunctive placebo) in both anxiety definition subgroups. For patients with anxious distress, the least squares mean difference (95% CI) at week 6 was -3.00 (-4.29, -1.71; P<0.0001) and, for those without anxious distress, was -1.38 (-2.71, -0.05; P=0.043). For patients with anxious depression, the difference was -2.19 (-3.60, -0.78; P=0.0023), compared with -2.34 (-3.58, -1.10; P=0.0002) for those without anxious depression. The most common TEAEs among patients with anxiety symptoms receiving ADT + brexpiprazole were akathisia, headache, restlessness, somnolence, and weight increase. There were no clinically meaningful differences in the rates of these TEAEs according to the presence or absence of anxiety symptoms.ConclusionAdjunctive brexpiprazole 2-3 mg/day may be efficacious in reducing depressive symptoms, and was well tolerated, in patients with clinically relevant anxiety symptoms.

Project description:Background: Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) is a moderately heritable disorder with a high lifetime prevalence. At present, laboratory blood tests to support MDD diagnosis are not available. Methods: We used a classifier approach on blood gene expression profiles of a unique set of non-medicated subjects (MDD patients and controls) to select genes of which expression is predictive for disease status. To reveal blood gene expression changes related to MDD disease, we applied a powerful ex vivo stimulus to the blood, i.e. incubation with lipopolysaccharide (LPS; 10 ng/ml blood). Results: Based on LPS-stimulated blood gene expression using whole-genome microarrays in 42 subjects (primary cohort; 21 MDD patients (mean age 42.3 years), 21 healthy controls (mean age 41.9 years)), we identified a set of genes (CAPRIN1, CLEC4A, KRT23, MLC1, PLSCR1, PROK2, ZBTB16) that serves as a molecular signature of MDD. These findings were validated for the primary cohort using an independent quantitative PCR method (P = 0.007). The difference between depressive patients and controls was confirmed (P = 0.019) in a replication cohort of 13 patients with MDD (mean age 42.8 years) and 14 controls (mean age 45.6 years). The MDD-signature score comprised of expression levels of 7 genes could discriminate depressive patients from controls with sensitivity of 76.9% and specificity of 71.8%. Conclusions: We show for the first time that molecular analysis of stimulated blood cells can be used as an endophenotype for MDD diagnosis, which is a milestone in establishing biomarkers for neuropsychiatric disorders with moderate heritability in general. Our results may provide a new entry point for following and predicting treatment outcome, as well as prediction of severity and recurrence of MDD. In total, 33 MDD patients and 34 healthy controls were analyzed using basal gene expression in whole blood, and gene expression from whole blood that was stimulated with LPS for 5-6 h, using microarrays. Patients were arbitrarily selected from all patients to serve as primary cohort (nMDD = 21 (MDD01-MDD21); nControls = 21 (Con01-Con21)), or replication cohort (nMDD = 12 (MDD22-MDD35); nControls = 13 (Con22-Con37)) using microarrays. This submission does not include Samples CON21_LPS or CON30_LPS.

Project description:BackgroundAtypical antipsychotic medications are widely prescribed for the adjunctive treatment of depression, yet their total risk-benefit profile is not well understood. We thus conducted a systematic review of the efficacy and safety profiles of atypical antipsychotic medications used for the adjunctive treatment of depression.Methods and findingsWe included randomized trials comparing adjunctive antipsychotic medication to placebo for treatment-resistant depression in adults. Our literature search (conducted in December 2011 and updated on December 14, 2012) identified 14 short-term trials of aripiprazole, olanzapine/fluoxetine combination (OFC), quetiapine, and risperidone. When possible, we supplemented published literature with data from manufacturers' clinical trial registries and US Food and Drug Administration New Drug Applications. Study duration ranged from 4 to 12 wk. All four drugs had statistically significant effects on remission, as follows: aripiprazole (odds ratio [OR], 2.01; 95% CI, 1.48-2.73), OFC (OR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.01-2.0), quetiapine (OR, 1.79; 95% CI, 1.33-2.42), and risperidone (OR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.31-4.30). The number needed to treat (NNT) was 19 for OFC and nine for each other drug. All drugs with the exception of OFC also had statistically significant effects on response rates, as follows: aripiprazole (OR, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.58-2.72; NNT, 7), OFC (OR, 1.30, 95% CI, 0.87-1.93), quetiapine (OR, 1.53, 95% CI, 1.17-2.0; NNT, 10), and risperidone (OR, 1.83, 95% CI, 1.16-2.88; NNT, 8). All four drugs showed statistically significant effects on clinician-rated depression severity measures (Hedges' g ranged from 0.26 to 0.48; mean difference of 2.69 points on the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale across drugs). On measures of functioning and quality of life, these medications produced either no benefit or a very small benefit, except for risperidone, which had a small-to-moderate effect on quality of life (g?=?0.49). Treatment was linked to several adverse events, including akathisia (aripiprazole), sedation (quetiapine, OFC, and aripiprazole), abnormal metabolic laboratory results (quetiapine and OFC), and weight gain (all four drugs, especially OFC). Shortcomings in study design and data reporting, as well as use of post hoc analyses, may have inflated the apparent benefits of treatment and reduced the apparent incidence of adverse events.ConclusionsAtypical antipsychotic medications for the adjunctive treatment of depression are efficacious in reducing observer-rated depressive symptoms, but clinicians should interpret these findings cautiously in light of (1) the small-to-moderate-sized benefits, (2) the lack of benefit with regards to quality of life or functional impairment, and (3) the abundant evidence of potential treatment-related harm. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.