Targeting Prodromal Alzheimer Disease With Avagacestat: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Early identification of Alzheimer disease (AD) is important for clinical management and affords the opportunity to assess potential disease-modifying agents in clinical trials. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a randomized trial to prospectively enrich a study population with prodromal AD (PDAD) defined by cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) biomarker criteria and mild cognitive impairment (MCI) symptoms. OBJECTIVES: To assess the safety of the γ-secretase inhibitor avagacestat in PDAD and to determine whether CSF biomarkers can identify this patient population prior to clinical diagnosis of dementia. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A randomized, placebo-controlled phase 2 clinical trial with a parallel, untreated, nonrandomized observational cohort of CSF biomarker-negative participants was conducted May 26, 2009, to July 9, 2013, in a multicenter global population. Of 1358 outpatients screened, 263 met MCI and CSF biomarker criteria for randomization into the treatment phase. One hundred two observational cohort participants who met MCI criteria but were CSF biomarker-negative were observed during the same study period to evaluate biomarker assay sensitivity. INTERVENTIONS: Oral avagacestat or placebo daily. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURE: Safety and tolerability of avagacestat. RESULTS: Of the 263 participants in the treatment phase, 132 were randomized to avagacestat and 131 to placebo; an additional 102 participants were observed in an untreated observational cohort. Avagacestat was relatively well tolerated with low discontinuation rates (19.6%) at a dose of 50 mg/d, whereas the dose of 125 mg/d had higher discontinuation rates (43%), primarily attributable to gastrointestinal tract adverse events. Increases in nonmelanoma skin cancer and nonprogressive, reversible renal tubule effects were observed with avagacestat. Serious adverse event rates were higher with avagacestat (49 participants [37.1%]) vs placebo (31 [23.7%]), attributable to the higher incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer. At 2 years, progression to dementia was more frequent in the PDAD cohort (30.7%) vs the observational cohort (6.5%). Brain atrophy rate in PDAD participants was approximately double that of the observational cohort. Concordance between abnormal amyloid burden on positron emission tomography and pathologic CSF was approximately 87% (κ = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.48-0.87). No significant treatment differences were observed in the avagacestat vs placebo arm in key clinical outcome measures. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Avagacestat did not demonstrate efficacy and was associated with adverse dose-limiting effects. This PDAD population receiving avagacestat or placebo had higher rates of clinical progression to dementia and greater brain atrophy compared with CSF biomarker-negative participants. The CSF biomarkers and amyloid positron emission tomography imaging were correlated, suggesting that either modality could be used to confirm the presence of cerebral amyloidopathy and identify PDAD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00890890.

Effects of adjunctive treatment with aripiprazole on body weight and clinical efficacy in schizophrenia patients treated with clozapine: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Clozapine is associated with significant weight gain and metabolic disturbances. This multicentre, randomized study comprised a double-blind, placebo-controlled treatment phase of 16 wk, and an open-label extension phase of 12 wk. Outpatients who met DSM-IV-TR criteria for schizophrenia, who were not optimally controlled while on stable dosage of clozapine for > or =3 months and had experienced weight gain of > or =2.5 kg while taking clozapine, were randomized (n=207) to aripiprazole at 5-15 mg/d or placebo, in addition to a stable dose of clozapine. The primary endpoint was mean change from baseline in body weight at week 16 (last observation carried forward). Secondary endpoints included clinical efficacy, body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference. A statistically significant difference in weight loss was reported for aripiprazole vs. placebo (-2.53 kg vs. -0.38 kg, respectively, difference=-2.15 kg, p<0.001). Aripiprazole-treated patients also showed BMI (median reduction 0.8 kg/m(2)) and waist circumference reduction (median reduction 2.0 cm) vs. placebo (no change in either parameter, p<0.001 and p=0.001, respectively). Aripiprazole-treated patients had significantly greater reductions in total and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. There were no significant differences in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale total score changes between groups but Clinical Global Impression Improvement and Investigator's Assessment Questionnaire scores favoured aripiprazole over placebo. Safety and tolerability were generally comparable between groups. Combining aripiprazole and clozapine resulted in significant weight, BMI and fasting cholesterol benefits to patients suboptimally treated with clozapine. Improvements may reduce metabolic risk factors associated with clozapine treatment.

The effect of antipsychotic medication on sexual function and serum prolactin levels in community-treated schizophrenic patients: results from the Schizophrenia Trial of Aripiprazole (STAR) study (NCT00237913).

BACKGROUND: The aim of this paper is to evaluate the effect of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia in a community based study on sexual function and prolactin levels comparing the use of aripiprazole and standard of care (SOC), which was a limited choice of three widely used and available antipsychotics (olanzapine, quetiapine or risperidone) (The Schizophrenia Trial of Aripiprazole [STAR] study [NCT00237913]). METHOD: This open-label, 26-week, multi-centre, randomised study compared aripiprazole to SOC (olanzapine, quetiapine or risperidone) in patients with schizophrenia (DSM-IV-TR criteria). The primary effectiveness variable was the mean total score of the Investigator Assessment Questionnaire (IAQ) at Week 26. The outcome research variables included the Arizona Sexual Experience scale (ASEX). This along with the data collected on serum prolactin levels at week 4, 8, 12, 18 and 26 will be the focus of this paper. RESULTS: A total of 555 patients were randomised to receive aripiprazole (n = 284) or SOC (n = 271). Both treatment groups experienced improvements in sexual function from baseline ASEX assessments. However at 8 weeks the aripiprazole treatment group reported significantly greater improvement compared with the SOC group (p = 0.007; OC). Although baseline mean serum prolactin levels were similar in the two treatment groups (43.4 mg/dL in the aripiprazole group and 42.3 mg/dL in the SOC group, p = NS) at Week 26 OC, mean decreases in serum prolactin were 34.2 mg/dL in the aripiprazole group, compared with 13.3 mg/dL in the SOC group (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The study findings suggest that aripiprazole has the potential to reduce sexual dysfunction, which in turn might improve patient compliance.

A multicenter, randomized, double-blind study of the effects of aripiprazole in overweight subjects with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder switched from olanzapine.

OBJECTIVE: Major mental disorders are associated with an increased risk for obesity-related cardiovascular mortality, leading to interest in risk-reduction approaches that target weight and risk-related plasma lipids, including use of antipsychotic agents with low metabolic risk. This multicenter, randomized, double-blind study compared the metabolic effects of aripiprazole versus olanzapine in overweight persons with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were previously on olanzapine treatment. METHOD: In total, 173 subjects with DSM-IV-TR-defined schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were randomly assigned to receive aripiprazole (N = 88) or olanzapine (N = 85) for 16 weeks in a study conducted from March 30, 2004, to August 8, 2006. Primary and secondary endpoints were mean weight change from baseline and percentage change from baseline in fasting triglyceride levels, respectively. RESULTS: At week 16, weight decreased significantly with aripiprazole versus olanzapine (-1.8 vs. +1.41 kg; p < .001). Significant differences in percentage change in triglyceride levels were observed with aripiprazole (decreases) versus olanzapine (increases) at all time-points. In addition, significantly more subjects receiving aripiprazole had clinically relevant (> or = 7%) weight loss versus olanzapine (11.1% vs. 2.6%; p = .038), and a lower percentage of subjects receiving aripiprazole had clinically relevant weight gain (2.5% vs. 9.1%; p = .082). Mean percentage changes in fasting total cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol at week 16 were significantly different with aripiprazole versus olanzapine, with no significant effects on glycemic laboratory measures. Mean Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scores for both groups were in the range of "no change" to "minimal improvement." CGI-I endpoint scores were statistically significantly better with olanzapine (mean +/- SE = 3.09 +/- 0.16) versus aripiprazole (mean +/- SE = 3.74 +/- 0.15; p < .001), and more subjects discontinued aripiprazole (N = 32/88; 36%) than olanzapine (N = 22/85; 26%). CONCLUSION: Significant improvements in weight and lipids observed during discontinuation of olanzapine and switch to aripiprazole treatment occurred with limited evidence of negative psychiatric effects, relative to uninterrupted continuation of olanzapine treatment. The results suggest that the potential value of therapeutic substitutions involving specific antipsychotic medications should be considered in overall efforts to reduce cardiovascular risk in this population.