A randomized, double-blind study of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in patients with generalized anxiety disorder

This study evaluated once-daily, extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This was a 10-week (8-week active treatment/2-week posttreatment drug-discontinuation/tapering phase), double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (D1448C00009). Primary end point was change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score. Overall, 951 patients with GAD were randomized (quetiapine XR: 50 mg/d, n = 234; 150 mg/d, n = 241; 300 mg/d, n = 241; placebo, n = 235). At week 8, HAM-A total scores significantly (P < 0.001) improved versus placebo (-11.10) with quetiapine XR 50 mg/d (-13.31) and 150 mg/d (-13.54), but not 300 mg/d (-11.87; P = 0.240). At week 1, HAM-A total scores significantly improved versus placebo (-5.94) with quetiapine XR 50 mg/d (-7.47; P < 0.01), 150 mg/d (-8.19; P < 0.001), and 300 mg/d (-7.23; P < 0.01). Versus placebo at week 8, quetiapine XR 50 and 150 mg/d significantly improved HAM-A psychic (P < 0.01 and P < 0.001, respectively) and somatic (P < 0.001; P < 0.01, respectively) cluster scores, HAM-A response (≥ 50% total score reduction; P < 0.05), and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement categorical changes (P < 0.05). For quetiapine XR 150 mg/d, significant (P < 0.05) improvements were seen for HAM-A remission (total score, ≤ 7) and Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness scores. For quetiapine XR 300 mg/d, improvements in these secondary variables were not significantly different versus placebo. Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index global scores improved with all 3 doses (quetiapine: XR 50 mg/d, -4.07 [P < 0.05]; 150 mg/d, -4.38 [P < 0.05]; 300 mg/d, -3.97 [P < 0.05], versus -3.31 with placebo). Adverse events (>10% with quetiapine XR) were dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, dizziness, headache, and fatigue. Quetiapine XR (50/150 mg/d) monotherapy was effective at week 8 in patients with GAD; symptom improvement was seen at week 1 for all doses (50/150/300 mg/d). Safety and tolerability were consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.     

Extended Release Quetiapine Fumarate (Quetiapine XR) as Adjunct Therapy in Patients with Generalized Anxiety Disorder and a History of Inadequate Treatment Response: A Randomized,Double-Blind Study

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of adjunct extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and inadequate response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/ serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SSRI/SNRIs).

Methods

11-week (1-week single-blind placebo run-in; 8-week randomized treatment; 2-week post-treatment period), double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR or placebo adjunct to SSRI/SNRI. 50 mg initial dose; 150 mg/day, Day 3; 300 mg/day, Weeks × and 4 if indicated (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness [CGI-S] ≥ 4; 150 mg/day tolerated). Primary endpoint: change from randomization to Week 8 in HAM-A total score. Secondary variables: Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) psychic/somatic clusters, response and remission; and CGI-S.

Results

409 patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (n = 209) or placebo (n = 200); 41% and 55% of patients, respectively, had dose increases (300 mg/day). Week 8 mean change in HAM-A total score was not statistically significant for quetiapine XR (–10.74; p = 0.079) versus placebo (–9.61). Secondary variables were generally consistent with the primary analysis, except a significant reduction in HAM-A total score at Week 1 (–6.45, quetiapine XR versus –4.47, placebo; p < 0.001); significant improvements in HAM-A psychic cluster (p < 0.05) and CGI-S total (p < 0.05) scores at Week 8. Adverse events (.10% either group) were dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, headache, and dizziness.

Conclusions

In patients with GAD and inadequate response to SSRI/SNRI, adjunct quetiapine XR did not show a statistically significant effect for the primary endpoint at Week 8, although some secondary endpoints were statistically significant versus placebo. Quetiapine XR was generally well tolerated.     

Efficacy of extended release quetiapine fumarate monotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of two 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

Prospectively planned pooled analysis evaluating the efficacy of quetiapine extended release (XR) monotherapy in major depressive disorder (MDD). Data were pooled from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of quetiapine XR in outpatients with MDD. The primary endpoint was Montgomery-?sberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score change from randomization at week 6. Other evaluations were MADRS response/remission, Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety, and subgroup analyses. A total of 968 patients were randomized to quetiapine XR, 150 mg/day (n=315), 300 mg/day (n=323), or placebo (n=330). The mean MADRS total score reductions from randomization were significant at week 6 with quetiapine XR, 150 mg/day (-14.7; P<0.001) and 300 mg/day (-14.7; P<0.001) versus placebo (-11.1), with significant reductions versus placebo from week 1 onward. Response rates (week 6): 52.7% (P<0.001) quetiapine XR 150 mg/day and 49.5% (P<0.001) quetiapine XR 300 mg/day versus placebo (33.0%). MADRS remission (score≤8; week 6): 23.5% (P=0.208) quetiapine XR 150 mg/day and 28.8% (P<0.01) quetiapine XR 300 mg/day versus placebo (19.4%). Quetiapine XR (both doses) significantly improved eight of 10 MADRS items versus placebo at week 6. The therapeutic effect of quetiapine XR was neither limited to nor driven by factors such as sex, age, or severity of depression. In patients with MDD, quetiapine XR (150 and 300 mg/day) monotherapy reduced depressive symptoms, with significant improvements compared with placebo from week 1 onward.     

Extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy as maintenance treatment for generalized anxiety disorder: a long-term, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) as maintenance monotherapy for patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Time-to-event (anxiety symptom recurrence; maximum 52 weeks) multicenter, randomized-withdrawal, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day) following open-label run-in (4-8 weeks) and open-label stabilization (≥ 12 weeks). Primary variable: time from randomization to anxiety event. Secondary variables included: Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total, HAM-A psychic/somatic anxiety factors, Clinical Global Impression-Severity of Illness (CGI-S), and Quality of Life, Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) scores; adverse events (AE) reporting. Four hundred and thirty-two patients, stabilized on quetiapine XR, were randomized to continue quetiapine XR (N=216) or switch to placebo (N=216). Risk of anxiety symptom recurrence was significantly reduced by 81% for quetiapine XR versus placebo: hazard ratio=0.19 (95% confidence interval 0.12-0.31; P<0.001). Fewer patients receiving quetiapine XR (N=22, 10.2%) than placebo (N=84, 38.9%) experienced anxiety symptom recurrence. Significant differences were observed between quetiapine XR and placebo in: HAM-A total, psychic/somatic, CGI-S (all P<0.001) and Q-LES-Q (P<0.05) scores. AEs (>10%) during open-label treatment were dry mouth, sedation, somnolence, dizziness, fatigue, and constipation. During randomized treatment, the most common AEs for quetiapine XR were headache and nasopharyngitis. Quetiapine XR monotherapy reduced the risk of anxiety symptom recurrence in patients with GAD stabilized on quetiapine XR, with tolerability results consistent with the known profile of quetiapine.     

A Randomized,Double-blind Study of the Efficacy and Tolerability of Extended Release Quetiapine Fumarate (Quetiapine XR) Monotherapy in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

Objectives

Evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD).

Methods

10-week (8-week active-treatment/2-week post-treatment), randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study (D1448C00004). Patients received quetiapine XR 150 mg/day, escitalopram 10 mg/day, or placebo; patients with an inadequate response (<20% improvement in MADRS total score) at Week 2 received double-treatment dose. Primary endpoint: Week 8 change from randomization in MADRS total score. Secondary endpoints included: MADRS response (≥50% improvement) and remission (score ≤8), HAM-D total and Item 1, HAM-A total, psychic and somatic, CGI-S total, PSQI global, and Q-LES-Q-SF% maximum total scores; tolerability was assessed throughout.

Results

471 patients were randomized. No significant improvements in MADRS total score were observed at Week 8 (LOCF) with either active treatment (quetiapine XR, −17.21 [p=0.174]; escitalopram, −16.73 [p=0.346]) versus placebo (−15.61). There were no significant differences in secondary endpoints versus placebo, with the exception of Week 8 change in PSQI global score (quetiapine XR, −4.96 [p < 0.01] versus placebo, −3.37). MMRM analysis of observed cases data suggested that the primary analysis may not be robust. Most commonly reported AEs included: dry mouth, somnolence, and dizziness for quetiapine XR; headache and nausea for escitalopram.

Conclusions

In this study, neither quetiapine XR (150/300 mg/day) nor escitalopram (10/20 mg/day) showed significant separation from placebo. Both compounds have been shown previously to be effective in the treatment of MDD; possible reasons for this failed study are discussed. Quetiapine XR was generally well tolerated with a profile similar to that reported previously.     

Remission rates with venlafaxine extended release in Greek outpatients with generalized anxiety disorder. A double-blind, randomized, placebo controlled study

The primary endpoints in this study were the remission rates [final Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total score < or =7] and reduction from baseline in the HAM-A total score in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and no associated depression. Patients with GAD (DSM-IV and HAM-A total score >18) were randomly assigned to treatment with venlafaxine XR or placebo for 8 weeks. A 1-week placebo run-in period preceded the double-blind phase. Patients with a >20% drop in their total HAM-A score during the run-in period, were excluded from the double-blind phase. All patients started therapy with 75 mg/day venlafaxine XR or matched placebo. Patients with less than 30% decrease in their HAM-A total score at the end of the second week, doubled their dose. Patients on the 150 mg/day dose underwent a 1-week taper period. Of the 24 patients in the venlafaxine XR group, 62.5% achieved remission versus 9.1% in the placebo group (P=0.0006). The mean decrease from baseline in HAM-A total score was 19.2 points for the venlafaxine XR group and 10.8 points for the placebo group (P<0.001). Eleven placebo-treated patients and seven venlafaxine XR treated patients doubled their dose at the end of the second week of double-blind treatment. No patient interrupted therapy because of side-effects. No changes in systolic or diastolic blood pressure were observed. Venlafaxine XR 75-150 mg/day was well tolerated. The remission rates achieved with venlafaxine 75-150 mg/day in non-depressed GAD patients were high with good tolerability.     

Long-term functioning and sleep quality in patients with major depressive disorder treated with extended-release quetiapine fumarate

The aim of this study was to assess patients' functioning and sleep quality during extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) maintenance treatment. A double-blind, randomized-withdrawal maintenance study of quetiapine XR monotherapy was carried out in patients with major depressive disorder. Following 4-8 weeks of open-label quetiapine XR and 12-18 weeks of open-label quetiapine XR stabilization (50, 150, or 300 mg/day), eligible patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (50, 150, or 300 mg/day) or placebo. Secondary variables of the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) were used to assess functioning and sleep quality and are reported here. Quetiapine XR significantly maintained functioning versus placebo. Changes in the least squares means (LSM) from randomization in the SDS total scores were as follows: -0.45, quetiapine XR (P<0.05), versus 0.44, placebo. Quetiapine XR significantly maintained SDS domains 'social life/leisure' (-0.19; P<0.05) and 'family life/home responsibilities' (-0.22; P<0.05) versus placebo (0.13 and 0.10, respectively). Quetiapine XR significantly maintained sleep quality (LSM change in PSQI total scores: 0.06, quetiapine XR vs. 1.35, placebo; P<0.001), with five of seven PSQI components being significant for quetiapine XR versus placebo. In conclusion, quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day) monotherapy better maintains overall functioning and sleep quality than placebo in patients with major depressive disorder.     

Eight-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind comparison of the antidepressant efficacy and tolerability of bupropion XR and venlafaxine XR

The efficacy, safety and tolerability of bupropion XR and venlafaxine XR was assessed and compared with placebo in adult outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Adults meeting DSM-IV criteria for MDD with a minimum Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) 17-Item total score of > or =18 were randomized to eight weeks of double-blind treatment with either bupropion XR (150 mg/day), venlafaxine XR (75 mg/day) or placebo. At the end of the fourth week of treatment, a dosage increase to bupropion XR 300 mg/day or venlafaxine XR 150 mg/day was allowed if, in the opinion of the investigator, response was inadequate. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change from baseline at week 8 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score last observation carried forward (LOCF). Mean changes from baseline at week 8 (LOCF) in MADRS total score were statistically significant for bupropion XR and venlafaxine XR patients compared to the placebo group: -16.0 for bupropion XR (P = 0.006 vs placebo), -17.1 for venlafaxine XR (P < 0.001 vs placebo) and -13.5 for placebo. Secondary outcomes (including CGI-S, HAM-A, MEI, Q-LES-Q-SF, responder and remitter analyses) also improved significantly for both active treatment groups compared with placebo. The most frequently reported adverse events were dry mouth and insomnia for bupropion XR, and nausea, hyperhidrosis, fatigue, and insomnia for venlafaxine XR. In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, bupropion XR at doses up to 300 mg/day and venlafaxine XR at doses up to 150 mg/day demonstrated comparable antidepressant efficacy.     

Augmentative quetiapine in partial/nonresponders with generalized anxiety disorder: a randomized, placebo-controlled study

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a chronic and disabling condition. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of low-dose augmentative quetiapine (mean dose=50 mg/day) in patients with GAD and partial/no response to selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs). Twenty patients with GAD and partial/no response to SSRIs were randomized to quetiapine (n=10) or placebo (n=10) for 8 weeks, continuing their treatment with SSRIs. Analyses of variance with repeated measures on Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and Clinical Global Impression (CGIs; severity of illness) were carried out at baseline and after 8 weeks and the number of responders/remitters was computed and compared between the groups. HAM-A scores at baseline were 15.60 (± 4.48) in the placebo group and 18.50 (± 6.59) in the quetiapine group, and at the end-point, HAM-A scores in the placebo group were 10.40 (± 4.88) and 9.20 (± 5.86) in the quetiapine group. A significant time-by-treatment effect was found on the HAM-A (F=5.19, P=0.035) and CGIs scores (F=19.60, P<0.001) in favor of the quetiapine group. The number of responders was numerically superior in the quetiapine group (60 vs. 30%) without reaching statistical significance (χ=1.82, degree of freedom=1, P=0.37, φ=0.30). Remitters were 40% for the quetiapine group versus 20% for the placebo group (χ=0.95, degree of freedom=1, P=0.63, φ=0.22). Low-dose augmentative quetiapine may be an useful treatment option for patients with GAD and partial/no response to SSRIs. The lack of double-blind conditions and the limited sample size may limit the confidence in the reported results. Larger randomized controlled trials are warranted to confirm these data.     

The efficacy and tolerability of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate in hospitalized patients with acute schizophrenia: a 6-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Objectives: This study aimed to demonstrate efficacy of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) versus placebo in patients with acute schizophrenia. Methods: In this 6-week, randomized, double-blind study (5077IL/0041) patients were randomized to receive quetiapine XR (300, 600, or 800 mg/day), quetiapine fumarate immediate release (quetiapine IR) [300 or 600 mg/day], or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at Day 42. Secondary variables included PANSS response rate at Day 42 (>/=30% decrease in PANSS total score from baseline) and Clinical Global Impressions Severity (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I) ratings. Safety assessments included adverse event (AE) reporting and laboratory measures. Results: Of 532 patients randomized, 222 (41.7%) completed the study. Improvements in PANSS total scores from baseline to Day 42 across treatment groups were: quetiapine XR 300 mg/day -5.01, 600 mg/day -13.01 and 800 mg/day -11.17, quetiapine IR 300 mg/day -9.42 and 600 mg/day -6.97, and placebo -5.19; the difference in change was statistically significant only for quetiapine XR 600 mg/day (p = 0.033). There were no statistically significant differences between active treatment groups and placebo for PANSS response rates. Several post hoc analyses were conducted to explain the study efficacy outcome but these were inconclusive. Quetiapine XR was generally well tolerated with the majority of AEs being mild or moderate in intensity and no unexpected AEs. Conclusions: Superior efficacy of quetiapine XR versus placebo in patients with schizophrenia was demonstrated for quetiapine XR 600 mg/day. The safety and tolerability profile of quetiapine XR was similar to that of quetiapine IR.     

Quetiapine extended release: adjunctive treatment in major depressive disorder

Quetiapine extended release (XR) is a once-daily oral formulation of the atypical antipsychotic quetiapine that is available for use as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder (MDD). Systemic quetiapine exposure after orally administered quetiapine XR is similar to that of quetiapine immediate release at the same dosage, although quetiapine XR is absorbed more slowly and plasma concentrations are more stable over time. In two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational trials in patients with MDD with an inadequate response to antidepressants, quetiapine XR 300?mg/day adjunctive to antidepressant reduced depressive symptoms significantly more than antidepressant plus placebo, according to changes in Montgomery-?sberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores. In one trial, adjunctive quetiapine XR 150?mg/day also led to significantly greater reductions in MADRS total scores than antidepressant plus placebo. MDD response rates were significantly higher with adjunctive quetiapine XR 300?mg/day (but not 150?mg/day) than with antidepressant plus placebo. The numbers needed to treat to achieve an additional response over antidepressant plus placebo were 11-18 and 8-9 in the quetiapine XR 150 and 300?mg/day dosage groups, respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events were mostly of mild to moderate severity; 1% of adjunctive quetiapine XR and 1.3% of antidepressant plus placebo recipients reported serious adverse events.     

Quetiapine: a review of its use in the management of bipolar depression

Quetiapine (Seroquel?) is an orally administered atypical antipsychotic that is indicated for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, including bipolar depression. An extended-release (XR) formulation of quetiapine is also available. This review summarizes the pharmacological properties, efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine and quetiapine XR in patients with bipolar depression. Quetiapine is an antagonist at both serotonin 5-HT2 and dopamine D2 receptors, and its antipsychotic effects are thought to stem from interactions at these receptors. The antidepressant effects of quetiapine are poorly understood, but may be related to antagonism of 5-HT2A receptors in cortical regions, partial agonism of 5-HT1A in the prefrontal cortex in association with increased extracellular dopamine release in the region, or to reduced synaptic reuptake of noradrenaline resulting from inhibition of the noradrenaline reuptake transporter by the quetiapine metabolite norquetiapine. The efficacy and tolerability of quetiapine was evaluated in five 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre or multinational trials in patients with a major depressive episode (MDE) associated with bipolar disorder. Across trials, monotherapy with oral quetiapine 300 or 600?mg/day (or quetiapine XR 300?mg/day) produced significantly greater improvements than placebo in depressive symptoms (primary endpoint), according to the change in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score. In general, quetiapine and quetiapine XR were also associated with significantly higher MDE response and remission rates than placebo. Across trials, quetiapine and quetiapine XR produced significantly greater improvements in global severity of illness scores than placebo, according to changes in the Clinical Global Impressions scale score. There were no differences in treatment outcomes between quetiapine 300?mg/day and 600?mg/day dosage groups. Patients with bipolar depression who responded to quetiapine during two 8-week acute treatment trials also benefited from continuing quetiapine therapy for up to 52 weeks. Compared with quetiapine responders randomized to placebo, quetiapine responders who continued quetiapine 300 or 600?mg/day had a significantly reduced risk of recurrence of any mood events and of depression mood events, but not of hypomanic/manic events. In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, quetiapine maintenance therapy for up to 104 weeks was more efficacious than placebo or lithium in prolonging the time to recurrence of any mood event (primary endpoint). Patients in this trial had bipolar I disorder with mania, depression or a mixed episode as the index episode, and the trial included only patients who were responsive to acute phase quetiapine, which may have introduced a positive bias in favour of quetiapine over lithium during maintenance therapy. Quetiapine 300 or 600?mg/day and quetiapine XR 300?mg/day was generally well tolerated in patients with bipolar depression, with most treatment-emergent adverse events being of mild to moderate severity. The most frequent adverse events occurring during the acute treatment phase were dry mouth, sedation, somnolence, dizziness (quetiapine and quetiapine XR), constipation (quetiapine) and increased appetite (quetiapine XR). Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) occurred across quetiapine and placebo groups, but there were no significant differences between quetiapine and placebo recipients on objective measures of EPS and akathisia. In some trials, quetiapine recipients experienced significantly greater weight gain than placebo recipients. Across trials, some quetiapine recipients had clinically relevant increases in blood glucose or lipid parameters, although these also occurred in patients from other treatment groups. The clinical significance of these changes is uncertain. In conclusion, quetiapine and quetiapine XR are valuable additions to the first-line treatments for bipolar depression. Further head-to-head trials of quetiapine versus other drug regimens that are effective in bipolar depression would be of considerable interest.     

Adjunctive therapy with pregabalin in generalized anxiety disorder patients with partial response to SSRI or SNRI treatment

This study evaluated the efficacy of adjunctive pregabalin versus placebo for treatment of patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) who had not optimally responded to previous or prospective monotherapies. This was a phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients diagnosed with GAD who had a historical and current lack of response to pharmacotherapy [Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) of ≥ 22 at screening] were randomized to adjunctive treatment with either pregabalin (150-600 mg/day) or placebo. The primary outcome measure was the change in HAM-A total scores after 8 weeks of combination treatment. Adverse events were regularly monitored. Randomized patients (N=356) were treated with pregabalin (n=180) or placebo (n=176). Mean baseline HAM-A scores were 20.7 and 21.4, respectively. After treatment, the mean change in HAM-A was significantly greater for pregabalin compared with placebo (-7.6 vs. -6.4, respectively; P<0.05). HAM-A responder rates (≥ 50% reduction) were significantly higher for pregabalin (47.5%) versus placebo (35.2%; P=0.0145). The time-to-sustained response favored pregabalin over placebo (P=0.014). Adverse events were consistent with previous studies and discontinuations were infrequent for pregabalin (4.4%) and placebo (2.3%). The study was discontinued early after an interim analysis. The results indicate that adjunctive pregabalin is an efficacious therapy for patients with GAD who experience an inadequate response to established treatments.     

Number needed to treat and time to response/remission for quetiapine monotherapy efficacy in acute bipolar depression: evidence from a large, randomized, placebo-controlled study

The objectives of this analysis are to elucidate the clinical significance of antidepressant effects with quetiapine by evaluating number needed to treat as well as time to response and remission with quetiapine monotherapy in patients with acute bipolar depression. A post-hoc analysis was conducted of 542 patients with bipolar I or II disorder, (moderate to severe depression), randomized to 8 weeks of double-blind treatment with quetiapine 600 mg/day (n=180), quetiapine 300 mg/day (n=181), or placebo (n=181). Number needed to treat, time to response (> or =50% reduction from baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score) and time to remission (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score < or =12) were evaluated. Response rates at week 8 were 58.2 and 57.6% for quetiapine 600 and 300 mg/day, respectively, and 36.1% for placebo (P<0.001). Remission rates were 52.9% for both quetiapine groups and 28.4% for placebo (P<0.001). The number needed to treat was five for both response and remission for quetiapine (600 and 300 mg/day) compared with placebo. Median time to response and remission were significantly shorter with quetiapine 600 and 300 mg/day than placebo. No between-group difference was found in the incidence of treatment-emergent mania or hypomania (quetiapine 600 mg/day: 2.2%, quetiapine 300 mg/day: 3.9, and placebo: 3.9%). In conclusion, quetiapine compared with placebo significantly reduces time to response and remission compared with placebo, and has a favorable number needed to treat.     

Evaluation of the feasibility of switching from immediate release quetiapine to extended release quetiapine fumarate in stable outpatients with schizophrenia

This double-blind, double-dummy study (D1444C00146) evaluated the efficacy and safety of switching patients with clinically stable schizophrenia from quetiapine immediate release (IR) to the same dose of once-daily extended release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR). Patients received quetiapine IR 400-800 mg/day twice daily for 4 weeks, and were then randomized (2 : 1) to a once-daily equivalent dose of quetiapine XR or maintained on IR for 6 weeks. The primary variable was the proportion of patients who discontinued treatment owing to lack of efficacy or whose Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale scores increased by at least 20% from randomization to any visit. In total, 497 patients were randomized to quetiapine XR (n=331) or IR (n=166). Noninferiority (6% margin; one-sided test, 2.5% significance level) was narrowly missed for the primary efficacy variable for the modified intention-to-treat population (9.1%, quetiapine XR; 7.2%, quetiapine IR; difference 1.86%; 95% confidence interval: -3.78, 6.57; P=0.0431), but was shown for the per-protocol population (5.3%, quetiapine XR; 6.2%, quetiapine IR; difference: -0.83%; 95% confidence interval: -6.75, 3.71; P=0.0017). Serious adverse event incidence was low for quetiapine XR and IR; there were no unexpected adverse events. In conclusion, efficacy was maintained without compromising safety/tolerability when switching patients with stable schizophrenia from twice-daily quetiapine IR to once-daily quetiapine XR (400-800 mg/day).     

A non-inferiority comparison of duloxetine and venlafaxine in the treatment of adult patients with generalized anxiety disorder

The present study is a non-inferiority comparison of duloxetine 60-120 mg/day and venlafaxine extended-release (XR) 75-225 mg/day for the treatment of adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The non-inferiority test was a prespecified plan to pool data from two nearly identical 10-week, multicentre, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind studies of duloxetine 60-120 mg/day and venlafaxine 75-225 mg/ day for the treatment of GAD. An independent expert consensus panel provided six statistical and clinical criteria for determining non-inferiority between treatments. Response was defined as > or =50% reduction in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) total score. In the pooled sample, patients were randomly assigned to duloxetine (n = 320), venlafaxine XR (n = 333) or placebo (n = 331). For the non-inferiority analysis, the per-protocol patients who were treated with duloxetine (n = 239) or venlafaxine XR (n = 262) improved significantly more (mean HAMA reductions were -15.4 and -15.2, respectively) than placebo-treated patients (n = 267; -11.6, P < or = 0.001, both comparisons). Response rates were 56%, 58% and 40%, respectively. Discontinuation rate because of AEs was significantly higher for duloxetine (13.4%, P < or = 0.001) and venlafaxine XR (11.4%, P < or = 0.01) groups compared with placebo (5.4%). Duloxetine 60-120 mg/day met all statistical and clinical criteria for non-inferiority and exhibited a similar tolerability profile compared with venlafaxine XR 75-225 mg/day for the treatment of adults with GAD.     

Escitalopram versus venlafaxine XR in the treatment of depression

This article reanalyses and reviews data from the two published randomized clinical trials comparing escitalopram and venlafaxine XR in the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder. The aim was to further compare the efficacy and tolerability of escitalopram and venlafaxine XR and to assess the impact of the two treatments on the patient's quality of life, as well as the benefit/risk of treatment. A total of 243 escitalopram-treated patients and 240 venlafaxine XR-treated patients were included in this analysis. Comparable treatment efficacy was achieved with respect to the prospectively defined primary efficacy endpoint (mean change from baseline in Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8). An analysis of the outcome at the end of study by baseline severity showed that the treatment difference became greater the more severely depressed the patients were at baseline. At the highest permitted doses, in the subgroup of patients who were severely depressed (baseline MADRS > or =30), patients treated with escitalopram had a statistically significantly greater improvement (P<0.05) in mean MADRS total scores than patients treated with venlafaxine XR at endpoint. For these patients, treatment with 20 mg/day escitalopram resulted in a statistically significantly (P<0.05) higher remission rate at week 8 (47%) than treatment with venlafaxine XR (29%). This difference was confirmed by the analysis of the pooled data, which showed that patients in the escitalopram group had a significantly (P<0.05) higher mean number of depression-free days (30.4 days) than those in the venlafaxine XR group (26.2 days) over the 8-week period. The relative benefit of escitalopram versus venlafaxine XR was 1.46, indicating that a patient was more likely to benefit from treatment with escitalopram. The proportions of patients who withdrew owing to adverse events were 7.5% in the escitalopram group and 11.2% in the venlafaxine XR group. The mean number of discontinuation emergent signs and symptoms in the venlafaxine XR group (mean: 5.0) was significantly (P<0.001) higher than for the escitalopram group (mean: 2.4).     

Escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) is effective and well tolerated in a placebo-controlled study in depression in primary care

Escitalopram was compared to placebo in moderately to severely depressed patients in primary care with citalopram as the active reference. Patients were randomized to receive flexible doses of 10-20 mg/day escitalopram (n=155), 20-40 mg/day citalopram (n=160), or placebo (n=154) over an 8-week double-blind period. The primary efficacy parameter was the change from baseline to last assessment in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score. Escitalopram produced a statistically significant therapeutic difference of 2.9 points (P=0.002) compared to placebo, and escitalopram was consistently and statistically significantly more efficacious than placebo from week 1 onwards. Analysis of Clinical Global Impression-Severity and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement confirmed the primary efficacy results. By week 8, significantly more patients had responded to treatment with escitalopram than with citalopram (P=0.021) or placebo (P=0.009). Escitalopram was as well tolerated as citalopram and had a similar adverse event profile. Both escitalopram- and citalopram-treated patients had placebo-level adverse event withdrawal rates (3% and 4%, respectively). This study demonstrates the consistent antidepressant efficacy and excellent tolerability of escitalopram 10-20 mg/day in primary care patients with major depressive disorder.     

Quetiapine or haloperidol as monotherapy for bipolar mania--a 12-week, double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial.

METHODS: Patients (n=302) with bipolar I disorder (manic episode) were randomised to 12 weeks' double-blind treatment with quetiapine (flexibly dosed up to 800 mg/day), placebo, or haloperidol (up to 8 mg/day). The primary efficacy outcome variable was change from baseline to Day 21 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score. RESULTS: YMRS score improved with quetiapine at Day 21 (-12.29 versus -8.32 for placebo; P<0.01). The difference in favor of quetiapine increased by Day 84 (-17.52 versus -9.48; P<0.001). Haloperidol also showed an advantage over placebo at Days 21 and 84 (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in efficacy measures between quetiapine and haloperidol groups at any assessment except Day 21. The only common adverse event with quetiapine was somnolence (12.7%). Extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS), including akathisia, occurred at 59.6% with haloperidol, 12.7% with quetiapine, 15.8% with placebo. Most quetiapine responders (84%) received a dose of 400-800 mg/day. CONCLUSIONS: Quetiapine was effective and well tolerated. The efficacy and tolerability profile of haloperidol (including its propensity for EPS) supported study validity.     

Escitalopram and duloxetine in the treatment of major depressive disorder: a pooled analysis of two trials

Pooled analyses have shown that escitalopram has superior effectiveness versus all comparators, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors and venlafaxine. Recent studies have compared escitalopram with duloxetine. Data from two randomized, double-blind studies that compared escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) and duloxetine (60 mg/day) were pooled and analysed for all patients and for the subsample of severely depressed patients [baseline Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score > or =30]. Escitalopram (n=280) was superior to duloxetine (n=284) with respect to mean change from baseline in MADRS score at weeks 1, 2, 4 and 8 with a mean treatment difference at week 8 of 2.6 points (P<0.01). Similar results were seen for severely depressed patients, with a mean treatment difference of 3.7 points (P<0.01). Response and remission rates at week 8 were significantly higher for patients treated with escitalopram [response 67.1% for escitalopram compared with 53.2% for duloxetine, P<0.001; remission (MADRS< or =12) 54.3% for escitalopram compared with 44.4% for duloxetine, P<0.05]. The numbers needed to treat based on response and remission rates, in favour of escitalopram, were 8 and 11, respectively, for all patients (6 and 7, respectively, for severely depressed patients). Significantly fewer (P<0.001) patients (all cause and owing to adverse events) withdrew from the escitalopram group. This pooled analysis shows that over an 8-week treatment period, escitalopram (10-20 mg/day) is superior in both effectiveness and tolerability compared with duloxetine (60 mg/day).