-
1.
Effect of Sublingual Dexmedetomidine vs Placebo on Acute Agitation Associated With Bipolar Disorder: A Randomized Clinical Trial.
Preskorn, SH, Zeller, S, Citrome, L, Finman, J, Goldberg, JF, Fava, M, Kakar, R, De Vivo, M, Yocca, FD, Risinger, R
JAMA. 2022;(8):727-736
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Acute agitation is common in patients with bipolar disorder and requires urgent management to relieve distress and to prevent escalation to aggressive behavior. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the effect of orally absorbed, sublingual dexmedetomidine, a selective α2A-adrenergic receptor agonist on symptoms of acute agitation in patients with bipolar disorder. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 15 sites in the US with enrollment between February 24, 2020, and April 27, 2020, and final follow-up on May 21, 2020. A total of 380 adults with bipolar I or II disorder were randomized and 362 completed the study. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to 3 groups: sublingual dexmedetomidine 180 μg (n = 127), sublingual dexmedetomidine 120 μg (n = 127), or placebo (n = 126). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary efficacy end point was the mean change from baseline at 2 hours for the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PEC) total score. The range of possible total scores is 5 (absence of agitation) to 35 (extremely severe). The secondary end point was the earliest time of a statistically significant change in PEC total score from baseline for the drug vs placebo. On the primary efficacy end point, to account for multiplicity associated with comparing 2 sublingual dexmedetomidine doses with placebo, the 2-sided significance level for each dose vs placebo was set at .025. RESULTS Of 380 patients randomized (mean age, 45.6 years; 54.8% women; and 56.1% Black individuals), 378 (99.5%) self-administered the study medication and completed the study. Baseline agitation was mild to moderate, with an overall mean PEC total score of 18.0. Two hours after taking the medication, the mean changes from baseline in PEC total score were -10.4 for sublingual dexmedetomidine 180 μg, -9.0 for sublingual dexmedetomidine 120 μg, and -4.9 for placebo. Least-square mean differences from placebo in the sublingual dexmedetomidine groups at 2 hours were -5.4 (97.5% CI, -6.6 to -4.2) for 180 μg and -4.1 (97.5% CI, -5.3 to -2.9) for 120 μg (both doses P < .001 vs placebo). Treatment effects began 20 minutes after taking the medication among patients in the sublingual dexmedetomidine groups (least-square mean difference for 180 μg, -1.1 [97.5% CI, -2.0 to -0.2]; P = .007; for 120 μg, -1.0 [97.5% CI, -1.9 to -0.1]; P = .009). Adverse events occurred in 35.7% of patients taking 180 μg of dexmedetomidine, 34.9% taking 120 μg, and 17.5% taking placebo. The most common adverse events (≥5%) in the respective 180 μg, 120 μg, and placebo groups were somnolence (21.4% and 20.6% vs 4.8%); dry mouth (4.8% and 7.1% vs 0.8%); hypotension (6.3% and 4.8% vs 0%); and dizziness (5.6% and 5.6% vs 0.8%). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among patients with mild to moderate agitation associated with bipolar disorder, treatment with a sublingual film formulation of dexmedetomidine 120 μg or 180 μg, compared with placebo, resulted in significantly greater reduction in the agitation score at 2 hours. Further research is needed to understand the spectrum of patients for whom this treatment would be effective and feasible and to better understand the clinical importance of the observed effect size. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04276883.
-
2.
Safety and Effectiveness of Long-Term Treatment with Lurasidone in Older Adults with Bipolar Depression: Post-Hoc Analysis of a 6-Month, Open-Label Study.
Forester, BP, Sajatovic, M, Tsai, J, Pikalov, A, Cucchiaro, J, Loebel, A
The American journal of geriatric psychiatry : official journal of the American Association for Geriatric Psychiatry. 2018;(2):150-159
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the safety and effectiveness of 6 months of treatment with lurasidone in older adults with a diagnosis of bipolar I depression. DESIGN Post-hoc analysis of a multicenter, 6-month, open-label extension study. SETTING Outpatient. PARTICIPANTS Patients aged 55 to 75 years with a DSM-IV-TR diagnosis of bipolar I depression who had completed 6 weeks of double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment with either lurasidone monotherapy (1 study) or adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate (2 studies). INTERVENTION Flexible doses of lurasidone, 20 to 120 mg/day, either as monotherapy, or adjunctive with lithium or valproate. MEASUREMENTS Effectiveness was assessed using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS; change from open-label-baseline to month-6, observed case analysis). RESULTS A total of 141 older adults entered the extension study (monotherapy, N = 55; 39%; adjunctive therapy, N = 86; 61%). At the end of 6 months of open-label treatment with lurasidone, as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy, minimal changes were observed in the older adult sample in mean weight (-1.0 kg and -0.4 kg, respectively); and median total cholesterol (-2.0 mg/dL and +6.0 md/dL, respectively), triglycerides (+2.5 mg/dL and +6.0 mg/dL, respectively), and HbA1c (0.0% and -0.1%, respectively). Patients treated with 6 months of lurasidone showed a mean improvement on the MADRS in both the monotherapy (-6.2) and adjunctive therapy (-6.7) groups. CONCLUSIONS Results of these post-hoc analyses found that up to 7.5 months of lurasidone treatment for bipolar depression in older adults was associated with minimal effects on weight and metabolic parameters, with low rates of switching to hypomania or mania, and was well tolerated. The antidepressant effectiveness of lurasidone in this age group was maintained over the 6-month treatment period.
-
3.
Treatment of Early-Age Mania: Outcomes for Partial and Nonresponders to Initial Treatment.
Walkup, JT, Wagner, KD, Miller, L, Yenokyan, G, Luby, JL, Joshi, PT, Axelson, DA, Robb, A, Salpekar, JA, Wolf, D, et al
Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2015;(12):1008-19
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The Treatment of Early Age Mania (TEAM) study evaluated lithium, risperidone, and divalproex sodium (divalproex) in children with bipolar I disorder who were naive to antimanic medication, or were partial or nonresponders to 1 of 3 study medications. This report evaluates the benefit of either an add-on or a switch of antimanic medications for an 8-week trial period in partial responders and nonresponders, respectively. METHOD TEAM is a randomized, controlled trial of individuals (N = 379) aged 6 to 15 years (mean ± SD = 10.2 ± 2.7 years) with DSM-IV bipolar I disorder (mixed or manic phase). Participants (n = 154) in this report were either nonresponders or partial responders to 1 of the 3 study medications. Nonresponders (n = 89) were randomly assigned to 1 of the other 2 antimanic medications and cross-tapered. Partial responders (n = 65) were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 other antimanic medications as an add-on to their initial medication. Adverse event (AE) rates are reported only for the add-on group. RESULTS Response rate for children switched to risperidone (47.6%) was higher than for those switched to either lithium (12.8%; p = .005; number needed to treat [NNT] = 3; 95% CI = 1.71-9.09) or divalproex (17.2%; p = .03; NNT = 3; 95% CI = 1.79-20.10); response rate for partial responders who added risperidone (53.3%) was higher than for those who added divalproex (0%; p = .0002; NNT = 2; 95% CI = 1.27-3.56) and trended higher for lithium (26.7%; p = .07; NNT = 4). Reported AEs in the add-on group were largely consistent with the known AE profile for the second medication. Weight gain (kg) was observed for all add-on medications: lithium add-on (n = 29 of 30) = 1.66 ± 1.97; risperidone add-on (n = 15 of 15) = 2.8 ± 1.34; divalproex add-on (n = 19 of 20) = 1.42 ± 1.96. There was no evidence at the 5% significance level that the average weight gain was different by study medication for partial responders (p = .07, 1-way analysis of variance). CONCLUSION Risperidone appears to be more useful than lithium or divalproex for children with bipolar I disorder and other comorbid conditions who are nonresponders or partial responders to an initial antimanic medication trial. Clinical trial registration information-Study of Outcome and Safety of Lithium, Divalproex and Risperidone for Mania in Children and Adolescents (TEAM); http://clinicaltrials.gov/; NCT00057681.
-
4.
Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of quetiapine in youth with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder: a 26-week, open-label, continuation study.
Findling, RL, Pathak, S, Earley, WR, Liu, S, DelBello, M
Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology. 2013;(7):490-501
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The purpose of this study was to describe the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy continued for up to 26-weeks in youth with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. METHODS Medically healthy boys and girls with a baseline Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of schizophrenia (ages 13-17 years) or a manic episode of bipolar I disorder (ages 10-17 years) who participated in one of two acute, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of immediate-release quetiapine were potentially eligible to enroll in a 26-week, open-label study. During the open-label study, quetiapine was flexibly dosed at 400-800 mg/day, with options to reduce dosing to 200 mg/day based on tolerability. Safety and tolerability outcomes assessed from open-label baseline to week 26 included adverse events (AEs), metabolic/laboratory parameters, extrapyramidal symptoms, suicidality, and vital signs. RESULTS Of 381 patients enrolled in the open-label study (n=176, schizophrenia; n=205, bipolar disorder diagnosis), 237 patients (62.2%) completed the 26-week study period (71.0%, schizophrenia; 54.6%, bipolar disorder). The most common AEs reported during the study included somnolence, headache, sedation, weight increase, and vomiting. A total of 14.9% of patients experienced a shift to potentially clinically significant low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and 10.2% of patients experienced a shift to potentially clinically significant high triglyceride levels. Weight gain ≥ 7% was reported in 35.6% of patients between open-label baseline and final visit. After adjustment for normal growth, 18.3% of study participants experienced clinically significant weight gain (i.e., increase in body mass index ≥ 0.5 standard deviations from baseline). CONCLUSIONS In this 26-week study, quetiapine flexibly dosed at 400-800 mg/day, with options to reduce dosing based on tolerability, was generally safe and well tolerated in youth. Clinicians should monitor lipid profiles and weight gain in youth with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder during treatment with quetiapine.
-
5.
Methylphenidate in mania project (MEMAP): study protocol of an international randomised double-blind placebo-controlled study on the initial treatment of acute mania with methylphenidate.
Kluge, M, Hegerl, U, Sander, C, Dietzel, J, Mergl, R, Bitter, I, Demyttenaere, K, Gusmão, R, Gonzalez-Pinto, A, Perez-Sola, V, et al
BMC psychiatry. 2013;:71
Abstract
BACKGROUND Treatment of patients with acute mania remains a considerable medical challenge since onset of action of antimanic medication is delayed for several days. Psychostimulants could have an earlier onset of action. This assumption is based on the 'vigilance regulation model of mania' which postulates that vigilance is unstable in manic patients. Accordingly, vigilance-stabilising psychostimulants could be more useful than conventional treatment in acute mania. We present here the study protocol of a trial intended to study the efficacy and safety of methylphenidate in the initial treatment of acute mania. METHODS/DESIGN A multi-centre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial will be conducted in 88 bipolar inpatients with acute mania. Male and female patients older than 18 years will be randomised to treatment with either methylphenidate (20 to 40 mg/day) or placebo for 2.5 days, given once or twice daily. The main outcome measure is the reduction in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) after 2.5 days of treatment. Other outcome measures include the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale-Excited Component (PANSS-EC) the Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Scale (CGI-BP), the Screen for Cognitive Impairment in Psychiatry (SCIP), actigraphy and the EEG-'Vigilance Algorithm Leipzig' (VIGALL). DISCUSSION A positive study outcome of the proposed study could substantially impact our understanding of the etiopathogenesis of mania and open new treatment perspectives.
-
6.
Zonisamide for bipolar disorder, mania or mixed states: a randomized, double blind, placebo-controlled adjunctive trial.
Dauphinais, D, Knable, M, Rosenthal, J, Polanski, M, Rosenthal, N
Psychopharmacology bulletin. 2011;(1):5-17
Abstract
OBJECTIVE This is the first multicenter, double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of adjunctive zonisamide for the treatment of bipolar mania or mixed state. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN One hundred four patients with Bipolar Disorder, Type I, II or NOS, in a manic, hypomanic or mixed state of illness were randomized to either adjunctive zonisamide or placebo. The study consisted of three phases: a 7 to 30 day screening and stabilization phase, 6 weeks of blinded treatment and a 1 to 3 week discontinuation phase. The primary outcome variable for manic and hypomanic patients was the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) both the YMRS and Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) served as primary outcome variables for patients in mixed states. Secondary outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), the Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire (Q-LES-Q) and an a priori analysis of response and remission. Metabolic parameters including weight, waist-hip ratio, body mass index, fasting glucose, cholesterol and triglyceride levels were also analyzed. Side effects were measured using the SAFTEE. PRINCIPAL OBSERVATIONS There were no statistically significant differences for any of the primary or secondary outcome measures between zonisamide and placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS In contrast to previous studies that suggested efficacy of adjunctive zonisamide in bipolar mania or mixed state, these results were not confirmed in this double blind controlled study.
-
7.
Long-term safety of divalproex sodium extended-release in children and adolescents with bipolar I disorder.
Redden, L, DelBello, M, Wagner, KD, Wilens, TE, Malhotra, S, Wozniak, P, Vigna, NV, Greco, N, Kovacs, X, Abi-Saab, W, et al
Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology. 2009;(1):83-9
Abstract
OBJECTIVE The objective of this open-label study was to assess the safety of divalproex sodium extended-release in the treatment of children and adolescents with acute mania associated with bipolar I disorder. METHODS This was a 6-month, Phase 3, open-label study in healthy subjects aged 9-17 years with a current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4(th) edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of bipolar I disorder manic or mixed episode. Divalproex sodium extended-release (DVPX-ER) was initiated at 15 mg/kg per day on day 1 (not to exceed 750 mg/day) with increases allowed to a maximum of 35 mg/kg per day. Study visits were conducted on day 1 and at months 1, 2, 3, and 6. Assessments included standard safety evaluations and appropriate rating scales for clinical effect. RESULTS A total of 226 subjects were enrolled; 109 subjects completed the study. The most common adverse events were weight gain (16%), nausea (9%), and increased appetite (8%). Nonsymptomatic elevations of mean ammonia levels in plasma were observed. The mean Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) decreased 12.4 from baseline to final visit; small improvements were seen in behavior and caregiver stress ratings. CONCLUSIONS DVPX-ER was generally well tolerated in children and adolescents with acute mania, with a side-effect profile similar to that observed in adults.
-
8.
Olanzapine versus divalproex versus placebo in the treatment of mild to moderate mania: a randomized, 12-week, double-blind study.
Tohen, M, Vieta, E, Goodwin, GM, Sun, B, Amsterdam, JD, Banov, M, Shekhar, A, Aaronson, ST, Bardenstein, L, Grecu-Gabos, I, et al
The Journal of clinical psychiatry. 2008;(11):1776-89
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To evaluate the efficacy and safety of olanzapine, divalproex, and placebo in a randomized, double-blind trial in mild to moderate mania (DSM-IV-TR criteria). METHOD The study was conducted from October 2004 to December 2006. A total of 521 patients from private practices, hospitals, and university clinics were randomly assigned to olanzapine (5-20 mg/day), divalproex (500-2500 mg/day), or placebo for 3 weeks; those completing continued with a 9-week double-blind extension. Efficacy (mean change in Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] total score was the primary outcome) and safety were assessed. RESULTS After 3 weeks of treatment, olanzapine-treated (N = 215) and placebo-treated (N = 105) patients significantly differed in YMRS baseline-to-endpoint total score change (p = .034; least squares [LS] mean: -9.4 and -7.4, respectively). Such changes were not significantly different between olanzapine vs. divalproex (N = 201) or divalproex vs. placebo. After 12 weeks of treatment, olanzapine- and divalproex-treated patients significantly differed in YMRS baseline-to-endpoint changes (p = .004; LS mean: -13.3 and -10.7, respectively). Of observed cases, 35.4% (35/99; 3 weeks) to 57.1% (28/49; 12 weeks) had valproate plasma concentrations lower than the recommended valproate therapeutic range, but these patients' YMRS scores were lower than those of patients with valproate concentrations above/within range. Compared with divalproex, after 12 weeks, olanzapine-treated patients had significant increases in weight (p < .001) and in glucose (p < .001), triglyceride (p = .003), cholesterol (p = .024), uric acid (p = .027), and prolactin (p < .001) levels. Divalproex-treated patients had significant decreases in leukocytes (p = .044) and platelets (p < .001) compared with olanzapine after 12 weeks of treatment. The incidence of potentially clinically significant weight gain (≥ 7% from baseline) was higher with olanzapine than with divalproex (3-week: p = .064, 6.4% vs. 2.7%; 12-week: p = .002, 18.8% vs. 8.5%; respectively). CONCLUSION Olanzapine was significantly more efficacious than placebo but not divalproex at 3 weeks and significantly more efficacious than divalproex at 12 weeks. Olanzapine-treated patients had significantly greater increases in weight and in glucose, cholesterol, triglyceride, uric acid, and prolactin levels than divalproex-treated patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00094549.
-
9.
A comparison of the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of divalproex sodium and olanzapine in the treatment of bipolar disorder.
Zajecka, JM, Weisler, R, Sachs, G, Swann, AC, Wozniak, P, Sommerville, KW
The Journal of clinical psychiatry. 2002;(12):1148-55
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study compared the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of divalproex and olanzapine in the treatment of acute mania associated with bipolar disorder. METHOD This randomized, 12-week, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study included DSM-IV-defined bipolar disorder type I patients hospitalized for acute mania and randomly assigned to treatment with divalproex or olanzapine. After an inpatient period of up to 21 days, subjects were followed as outpatients. Dose adjustment was permitted during the inpatient period. Efficacy was assessed using change from baseline in Mania Rating Scale (MRS) score to day 21; other efficacy measures included the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and the Clinical Global Impressions-Part I, Severity of Illness scale. The primary safety endpoint was change from baseline in weight. Other safety and tolerability endpoints included spontaneous adverse event reporting and changes from baseline in laboratory measures and vital signs. RESULTS 120 subjects (N = 63 divalproex, N = 57 olanzapine) were randomly assigned to treatment. No significant differences between groups were found for any efficacy variable for change from baseline to day 21. Mean MRS score changes from baseline to day 21 were -14.8 for divalproex and -17.2 for olanzapine (p =.210). A significantly (p <.05) greater proportion of olanzapine-treated subjects experienced somnolence, weight gain, edema, rhinitis, and speech disorder (slurred speech); no adverse events were significantly greater in the divalproex group. A number of laboratory measures also demonstrated significant treatment differences, but the clinical significance of many of these is uncertain. Mean body weight changes were significantly greater in the olanzapine group (+ 8.8 lb [+ 4.0 kg]) than the divalproex group (+ 5.5 lb [+ 2.5 kg], p <.050). One death occurred during the study (olanzapine group, diabetic ketoacidosis). CONCLUSION No significant difference in efficacy was found between treatment groups. Divalproex was associated with a more favorable adverse event profile and significantly less weight gain than olanzapine.