Adverse effects of methylphenidate for apathy in patients with Alzheimer's disease (ADMET2 trial).

OBJECTIVES: To examine clinically important adverse events (AEs) associated with methylphenidate (MPH) treatment of apathy in Alzheimer's Disease (AD) versus placebo, including weight loss, vital signs, falls, and insomnia. METHODS: The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET2) trial was a multicenter randomized, placebo-controlled trial of MPH to treat apathy in individuals with apathy and AD. Participants in ADMET2 had vital signs and weight measured at monthly visits through 6 months. AEs, including insomnia, falls, and cardiovascular events, were reported at every visit by participants and families using a symptom checklist. RESULTS: The study included 98 participants in the MPH group and 101 in the placebo group. Participants in the MPH group experienced greater weight loss on average than the placebo through the 6-month follow-up, with a difference in change between MPH and placebo of 2.8 lb (95% confidence interval, CI: 0.7, 4.9 lb). No treatment group differences in change during the trial were found in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. More participants in the MPH group reported falls during the follow-up, 10 versus 6 in MPH and placebo groups, respectively. No differences in post-baseline insomnia were observed between the treatment groups. No participants reported instances of myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, arrhythmia, stroke, or cardiomyopathy throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: MPH use in AD patients for treating apathy is relatively safe, particularly notable given the many medical comorbidities in this population. There was a statistically significant but modest weight loss associated with MPH use, and clinicians are thus advised to monitor weight during MPH treatment.

Leukocyte surface biomarkers implicate deficits of innate immunity in sporadic Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Blood-based diagnostics and prognostics in sporadic Alzheimer's disease (AD) are important for identifying at-risk individuals for therapeutic interventions. METHODS: In three stages, a total of 34 leukocyte antigens were examined by flow cytometry immunophenotyping. Data were analyzed by logistic regression and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analyses. RESULTS: We identified leukocyte markers differentially expressed in the patients with AD. Pathway analysis revealed a complex network involving upregulation of complement inhibition and downregulation of cargo receptor activity and Aß clearance. A proposed panel including four leukocyte markers - CD11c, CD59, CD91, and CD163 - predicts patients' PET Aß status with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93 (0.88 to 0.97). CD163 was the top performer in preclinical models. These findings have been validated in two independent cohorts. CONCLUSION: Our finding of changes on peripheral leukocyte surface antigens in AD implicates the deficit in innate immunity. Leukocyte-based biomarkers prove to be both sensitive and practical for AD screening and diagnosis.

Brain amyloid burden, sleep, and 24-hour rest/activity rhythms: screening findings from the Anti-Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's and Longitudinal Evaluation of Amyloid Risk and Neurodegeneration Studies.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To examine in a subsample at the screening phase of a clinical trial of a ß-amyloid (Aß) antibody whether disturbed sleep and altered 24-hour rest/activity rhythms (RARs) may serve as markers of preclinical Alzheimer's disease (AD). METHODS: Overall, 26 Aß-positive (Aß+) and 33 Aß-negative (Aß-) cognitively unimpaired participants (mean age = 71.3 ± 4.6 years, 59% women) from the Anti-Amyloid Treatment in Asymptomatic Alzheimer's (A4) and the Longitudinal Evaluation of Amyloid Risk and Neurodegeneration (LEARN) studies, respectively, wore actigraphs for 5.66 ± 0.88 24-hour periods. We computed standard sleep parameters, standard RAR metrics (mean estimating statistic of rhythm, amplitude, acrophase, interdaily stability, intradaily variability, relative amplitude), and performed a novel RAR analysis (function-on-scalar regression [FOSR]). RESULTS: We were unable to detect any differences between Aß+ and Aß- participants in standard sleep parameters or RAR metrics with our sample size. When we used novel FOSR methods, however, Aß+ participants had lower activity levels than Aß- participants in the late night through early morning (11:30 pm to 3:00 am), and higher levels in the early morning (4:30 am to 8:30 am) and from midday through late afternoon (12:30 pm to 5:30 pm; all p < .05). Aß+ participants also had higher variability in activity across days from 9:30 pm to 1:00 am and 4:30 am to 8:30 am, and lower variability from 2:30 am to 3:30 am (all p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: Although we found no association of preclinical AD with standard actigraphic sleep or RAR metrics, a novel data-driven analytic method identified temporally "local" RAR alterations in preclinical AD.

Neurobiologic Rationale for Treatment of Apathy in Alzheimer's Disease With Methylphenidate.

The public health burden of Alzheimer's disease (AD) is related not only to cognitive symptoms, but also to neuropsychiatric symptoms, including apathy. Apathy is defined as a quantitative reduction of goal-directed activity in comparison to a previous level of functioning and affects 30%-70% of persons with AD. Previous attempts to treat apathy in AD-both nonpharmacologically and pharmacologically-have been wanting. Catecholaminergic treatment with methylphenidate has shown encouraging results in initial trials of apathy in AD. Understanding the neuronal circuits underlying motivated behavior and their reliance on catecholamine actions helps provide a rationale for methylphenidate actions in the treatment of apathy in patients with AD. Anatomical, physiological, and behavioral studies have identified parallel, cortical-basal ganglia circuits that govern action, cognition, and emotion and play key roles in motivated behavior. Understanding the distinct contributions to motivated behavior of subregions of the prefrontal cortex-dorsolateral, orbital-ventromedial, and dorsomedial-helps to explain why degeneration of these areas in AD results in apathetic behaviors. We propose that the degeneration of the prefrontal cortex in AD produces symptoms of apathy. We further propose that methylphenidate treatment may ameliorate those symptoms by boosting norepinephrine and dopamine actions in prefrontal-striatal-thalamocortical circuits.

Measuring Apathy in Alzheimer's Disease in the Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2): A Comparison of Instruments.

BACKGROUND: Diagnostic criteria for apathy have been published but have yet to be evaluated in the context of clinical trials. The Apathy in Dementia Methylphenidate Trial 2 (ADMET 2) operationalized the diagnostic criteria for apathy (DCA) into a clinician-rated questionnaire informed by interviews with the patient and caregiver. OBJECTIVE: The goal of the present study was to compare the classification of apathy using the DCA with that using the Neuropsychiatric Inventory-apathy (NPI-apathy) subscale in ADMET 2. Comparisons between NPI-Apathy and Dementia Apathy Interview Rating (DAIR) scale, and DCA and DAIR were also explored. METHODS: ADMET 2 is a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial examining the effects of 20 mg/day methylphenidate on symptoms of apathy over 6 months in patients with mild to moderate Alzheimer's disease (AD). Participants scoring at least 4 on the NPI-Apathy were recruited. This analysis focuses on cross-sectional correlations between baseline apathy scale scores using cross-tabulation. RESULTS: Of 180 participants, the median age was 76.5 years and they were predominantly white (92.8%) and male (66.1%). The mean (±standard deviation) scores were 7.7 ± 2.4 on the NPI-apathy, and 1.9 ± 0.5 on the DAIR. Of those with NPI-defined apathy, 169 (93.9%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 89.3%-96.9%) met DCA diagnostic criteria. The DCA and DAIR overlapped on apathy diagnosis for 169 participants (93.9%, 95% CI 89.3%-96.9%). CONCLUSION: The measurements used for the assessment of apathy in patients with AD had a high degree of overlap with the DCA. The NPI-apathy cut-off used to determine apathy in ADMET 2 selects those likely to meet DCA criteria.

Sex Differences in the Neuropsychiatric Symptoms of Patients With Alzheimer's Disease.

The aim of this study was to describe sex differences in neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPSs) in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). Baseline scores on the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory, Neurobehavioral Rating Scale-Agitation subscale, and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory from patients with AD enrolled in a multicenter trial of citalopram for the treatment of agitation were analyzed. We found not only that patients with AD having agitation were likely to exhibit many other NPSs but also that the women in this study were more likely to exhibit a broader range of NPS than were the men. These results suggest greater heterogeneity in the clinical presentation of women compared to men, and thus in the potential targets for treatment in these patients. Further characterization of sex differences in NPS can inform future efforts aimed at establishing subtypes of patients for whom various treatment approaches will be most appropriate.

Changes in Neuropsychiatric Inventory Associated with Semagacestat Treatment of Alzheimer's Disease.

BACKGROUND: In a recent report, 76 weeks' treatment with a gamma-secretase inhibitor (semagacestat) was associated with poorer cognitive outcomes in Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: We sought to examine the effect of semagacestat treatment on neuropsychiatric symptoms (NPS). METHODS: 1,537 participants with mild to moderate AD were randomized to 76 weeks' treatment with placebo versus two doses of semagacestat. NPS were assessed with the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI-Total and subdomains). Cognition was assessed with the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive (first 11 items, ADAS11). Mixed-Model Repeated Measures was used to compare the effects of treatment assignment on change in NPI-total and subdomains over time. Survival analysis was used to assess the treatment effect on time to first worsening of NPS (NPI-Total ≥10 or NPI subdomain ≥4) for subjects with no or minor NPS at baseline. RESULTS: Participants on high dose semagecestat (140 mg) had greater increase in NPI-Total and greater risk of incident first worsening in NPI-Total and in subdomains of aberrant motor behavior, appetite, depression/dysphoria, and sleep. ADAS11 increased more in participants whose NPI-Total increased. CONCLUSION: In participants with mild to moderate AD, high dose semagacestat treatment was associated with greater severity and faster worsening of NPS in a pattern resembling an agitated depression. Increased NPS was associated with cognitive decline regardless of treatment assignment. These findings suggest that greater NPS may be the result of gamma-secretase treatment and emphasize the importance of monitoring NPS as potential adverse events in trials of novel treatments for AD.

R- and S-citalopram concentrations have differential effects on neuropsychiatric scores in elders with dementia and agitation.

AIMS: The aim was to determine the relationship between (R) and (S)-citalopram enantiomer exposure (AUC(0,24 h)) and therapeutic response in agitated individuals greater than 60 years old with Alzheimer's dementia (AD). METHODS: Citalopram enantiomer exposures (AUC(0,24 h)) derived from an established population pharmacokinetic analysis were utilized to explore the relationship between (R)- and (S)-citalopram area under the curve (AUC(0,24 )) and Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), Neurobehavioural Rating Scale-Agitation Subscale (NBRS-A), modified Alzheimer's Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC) and Neuropsychiatric Inventory Agitation subscale (NPIA) scores. Time dependent changes in these scores (disease progression) were accounted for prior to exploring the exposure effect relationship for each enantiomer. These relationships were evaluated using a non-linear-mixed effects modelling approach as implemented in nonmem v7.3. RESULTS: (S)-AUC(0,24 h) and (R)-AUC(0,24 h) each contributed to improvement in NBRS-A scores (k3(R) -0.502; k4(S) -0.712) as did time in treatment. However, increasing (R)-AUC(0,24 h) decreased the probability of patient response (maximum Δ -0.182%/AUC(0,24 h)) based on the CGIC while (S)-AUC(0,24 h) improved the probability of response (maximum Δ 0.112%/AUC(0,24 h)). (R)-AUC(0,24 h) was also associated with worsening in MMSE scores (-0.5 points). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that citalopram enantiomers contributed differentially to treatment outcomes. (R)-citalopram accounted for a greater proportion of the adverse consequences associated with racemic citalopram treatment in patients with AD including a decreased probability of treatment response as measured by the CGIC and a reduction in MMSE scores. The S-enantiomer was associated with increased probability of response based on the CGIC.

Effects of Citalopram on Neuropsychiatric Symptoms in Alzheimer's Dementia: Evidence From the CitAD Study.

OBJECTIVE: Citalopram has been shown to improve agitation in patients with Alzheimer's disease. The authors evaluated whether other neuropsychiatric symptoms improve with citalopram treatment compared with placebo. METHOD: In this planned secondary analysis of the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease study, the authors evaluated the effect of citalopram on the 12 neuropsychiatric symptom domains assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI). They compared caregiver-reported NPI scores at week 9 in patients receiving citalopram (30 mg/day) or placebo with regard to both the presence or absence of individual neuropsychiatric symptoms and individual domain scores (reflecting severity) in participants who had symptoms at week 9. RESULTS: At week 9, participants treated with citalopram were significantly less likely to be reported as showing delusions (odds ratio=0.40), anxiety (odds ratio=0.43), and irritability/lability (odds ratio=0.38). A comparison of median scores of participants with symptoms present at week 9 showed significant differences favoring citalopram for hallucinations and favoring placebo for sleep/nighttime behavior disorders. CONCLUSIONS: While dosage constraints must be considered because of citalopram's adverse effect profile, this agent's overall therapeutic effects in patients with Alzheimer's disease and agitation, in addition to efficacy for agitation/aggression, included reductions in the frequency of irritability, anxiety, and delusions; among patients who had these symptoms at week 9, they included a reduction in the severity of hallucinations but an increase in the severity of sleep/nighttime behavior disorders.

Principal components analysis of agitation outcomes in Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: We developed a composite measure of agitation as a secondary outcome of change over time in the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's disease study (CitAD). CitAD demonstrated a positive effect of citalopram on agitation on the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A). CitAD included additional agitation measures such as the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory. METHODS: We performed principal components analyses on change in individual item of these scales for the same, original CitAD subjects. RESULTS: The first principal component accounted for 12.6% of the observed variance and was composed of items that appear to reflect agitation. The effect size for citalopram calculated using this component was 0.53 (95% CI 0.22-0.83) versus 0.32 for the NBRS-A (95% CI 0.01-0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Results suggest that a composite measure of change in agitation might be more sensitive than change in a single primary agitation measure.

Sedation mediates part of Citalopram's effect on agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

BACKGROUND: We found a benefit of citalopram for agitation in the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease study (CitAD), and wondered if this was mediated by a sedative effect. CitAD was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial conducted at 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013. One hundred sixty-two participants with probable Alzheimer's disease (AD) and clinically significant agitation were analyzed in this study. Participants received a psychosocial intervention and were randomized to receive either citalopram or placebo (approximately half assigned to each group). Participants were rated on the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale Agitation subscale and measures of sedation (i.e., fatigue and somnolence). METHODS: Using the MacArthur Foundation procedures for documenting a mediator effect, we performed a secondary analysis examining whether sedation mediates the effect of treatment on agitation outcome. RESULTS: We found a statistically significant mediating effect of sedation on agitation outcomes, but the magnitude of the effect was small, only explaining 11% of the variance in agitation, with a significant, but modest effect size of 0.16 (95% CI: 0.08 to 0.22). CONCLUSIONS: The benefit of citalopram was partly due to sedation but largely due to other mechanisms of action.

A population pharmacokinetic model for R- and S-citalopram and desmethylcitalopram in Alzheimer's disease patients with agitation.

The citalopram for Alzheimer's disease trial evaluated citalopram for the management for agitation in Alzheimer's disease patients. Sparse data was available from this elderly patient population. A nonlinear mixed effects population pharmacokinetic modeling approach was used to describe the pharmacokinetics of R- and S-citalopram and their primary metabolite (desmethylcitalopram). A structural model with 4 compartments (one compartment/compound) with linear oral absorption and elimination described the data adequately. Overall, the model showed that clearance of the R-enantiomer was slower than the clearance of the S-enantiomer. Without accounting for any patient-specific covariates, the population estimate of the metabolic clearance of citalopram was 8.6 (R-citalopram) and 14 L/h (S-citalopram). The population estimate of the clearance of desmethylcitalopram was 23.8 (R-Dcit) and 38.5 L/h (S-Dcit). Several patient-specific covariates were found to have a significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of R,S-citalopram and desmethylcitalopram. A significant difference in the metabolic clearance of R-citalopram between males and females (13 vs 9.05 L/h) was identified in this analysis. Both R- and S-citalopram metabolic clearance decreased with age. Additionally, consistent with literature reports S-citalopram metabolic clearance increased with increasing body weight and was significantly influenced by CYPC19 genotype, with a difference of 5.8 L/h between extensive/rapid and intermediate/poor metabolizers. R,S-desmethylcitalopram clearance increased with increasing body weight. This model may allow for the opportunity to delineate the effect of R- and S-citalopram on pharmacodynamics outcomes related to the management of agitation in Alzheimer's disease.

The neural correlates of anomia in the conversion from mild cognitive impairment to Alzheimer's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Language impairment is frequently observed in patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD): in this study, we investigated the extent and distribution of brain atrophy in subjects with conversion from mild cognitive impairment (MCI) to AD with and without naming difficulties. METHODS: This study was approved by the institutional review board and was HIPAA compliant. All subjects or their legal representatives gave informed consent for participation. Ninety-one subjects from the Alzheimer's Disease Neuroimaging Initiative (ADNI) with (N = 51) and without (N = 40) naming impairment as per the Boston Naming Test (BNT), underwent brain magnetic resonance (MR) imaging 12 months before, at AD diagnosis, and 12 months after. Structural MR images were processed using voxel-based morphometry. Cross-sectional comparisons and mixed ANOVA models for assessing regional gray matter (GM) volume differences were performed. RESULTS: As from 12 months prior to AD diagnosis, patients with naming difficulties showed distinct areas of greater GM loss in the left fusiform gyrus (Brodmann area 20) than patients without naming difficulties. Differences in the GM atrophy extended to the left hemisphere in the subsequent 12 months. CONCLUSION: This study provided evidence of distinct patterns and dynamics of brain atrophy in AD patients with naming difficulties when compared to those with intact language, as early as 12 months prior to AD diagnosis and in the subsequent 12 months.

Citalopram for the Treatment of Agitation in Alzheimer Dementia: Genetic Influences.

OBJECTIVE: To assess potential genetic influences on citalopram treatment efficacy for agitation in individuals with Alzheimer dementia (AD). Six functional genetic variants were studied in the following genes: serotonin receptor 2A (HTR2A-T102C), serotonin receptor 2C (HTR2C-Cys23Ser), serotonin transporter (5HTT-LPR), brain-derived neurotropic factor (BDNF-Val66Met), apolipoprotein E (ε2, ε3, ε4 variants), and cytochrome P450 (CYP2C19). Treatment response by genotype was measured by (1) the agitation domain of the Neurobehavioral Rating Scale, (2) the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change scale (mADCS-CGIC), (3) the agitation domain of the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), and (4) the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory. METHOD: We utilized data from the Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease (CitAD) database. CitAD was a 9-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter clinical trial showing significant improvement in agitation and caregiver distress in patients treated with citalopram. Proportional odds logistic regression and mixed effects models were used to examine the above-mentioned outcome measures. RESULTS: Significant interactions were noted on the NPI agitation domain for HTR2A (likelihood ratio [LR] = 6.19, df = 2, P = .04) and the mADCS-CGIC for HTR2C (LR = 4.33, df = 2, P = .02) over 9 weeks. DISCUSSION: Treatment outcomes in CitAD showed modest, although statistically significant, influence of genetic variation at HTR2A and HTR2C loci. Future studies should continue to examine the interaction of known genetic variants with antidepressant treatment in patients with AD having agitation.

Effect of Dextromethorphan-Quinidine on Agitation in Patients With Alzheimer Disease Dementia: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common among patients with Alzheimer disease; safe, effective treatments are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of dextromethorphan hydrobromide-quinidine sulfate for Alzheimer disease-related agitation. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Phase 2 randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using a sequential parallel comparison design with 2 consecutive 5-week treatment stages conducted August 2012-August 2014. Patients with probable Alzheimer disease, clinically significant agitation (Clinical Global Impressions-Severity agitation score ≥4), and a Mini-Mental State Examination score of 8 to 28 participated at 42 US study sites. Stable dosages of antidepressants, antipsychotics, hypnotics, and antidementia medications were allowed. INTERVENTIONS: In stage 1, 220 patients were randomized in a 3:4 ratio to receive dextromethorphan-quinidine (n = 93) or placebo (n = 127). In stage 2, patients receiving dextromethorphan-quinidine continued; those receiving placebo were stratified by response and rerandomized in a 1:1 ratio to dextromethorphan-quinidine (n = 59) or placebo (n = 60). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was change from baseline on the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Agitation/Aggression domain (scale range, 0 [absence of symptoms] to 12 [symptoms occur daily and with marked severity]). RESULTS: A total of 194 patients (88.2%) completed the study. With the sequential parallel comparison design, 152 patients received dextromethorphan-quinidine and 127 received placebo during the study. Analysis combining stages 1 (all patients) and 2 (rerandomized placebo nonresponders) showed significantly reduced NPI Agitation/Aggression scores for dextromethorphan-quinidine vs placebo (ordinary least squares z statistic, -3.95; P < .001). In stage 1, mean NPI Agitation/Aggression scores were reduced from 7.1 to 3.8 with dextromethorphan-quinidine and from 7.0 to 5.3 with placebo. Between-group treatment differences were significant in stage 1 (least squares mean, -1.5; 95% CI, -2.3 to -0.7; P<.001). In stage 2, NPI Agitation/Aggression scores were reduced from 5.8 to 3.8 with dextromethorphan-quinidine and from 6.7 to 5.8 with placebo. Between-group treatment differences were also significant in stage 2 (least squares mean, -1.6; 95% CI, -2.9 to -0.3; P=.02). Adverse events included falls (8.6% for dextromethorphan-quinidine vs 3.9% for placebo), diarrhea (5.9% vs 3.1% respectively), and urinary tract infection (5.3% vs 3.9% respectively). Serious adverse events occurred in 7.9% with dextromethorphan-quinidine vs 4.7% with placebo. Dextromethorphan-quinidine was not associated with cognitive impairment, sedation, or clinically significant QTc prolongation. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this preliminary 10-week phase 2 randomized clinical trial of patients with probable Alzheimer disease, combination dextromethorphan-quinidine demonstrated clinically relevant efficacy for agitation and was generally well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01584440.

Change in agitation in Alzheimer's disease in the placebo arm of a nine-week controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Placebo responses raise significant challenges for the design of clinical trials. We report changes in agitation outcomes in the placebo arm of a recent trial of citalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (CitAD). METHODS: In the CitAD study, all participants and caregivers received a psychosocial intervention and 92 were assigned to placebo for nine weeks. Outcomes included Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A), modified AD Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC), Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI), the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI) Agitation/Aggression domain (NPI A/A) and Total (NPI-Total) and ADLs. Continuous outcomes were analyzed with mixed-effects modeling and dichotomous outcomes with logistic regression. RESULTS: Agitation outcomes improved over nine weeks: NBRS-A mean (SD) decreased from 7.8 (3.0) at baseline to 5.4 (3.2), CMAI from 28.7 (6.7) to 26.7 (7.4), NPI A/A from 8.0 (2.4) to 4.9 (3.8), and NPI-Total from 37.3 (17.7) to 28.4 (22.1). The proportion of CGI-C agitation responders ranged from 21 to 29% and was significantly different from zero. MMSE improved from 14.4 (6.9) to 15.7 (7.2) and ADLs similarly improved. Most of the improvement was observed by three weeks and was sustained through nine weeks. The major predictor of improvement in each agitation measure was a higher baseline score in that measure. CONCLUSIONS: We observed significant placebo response which may be due to regression to the mean, response to a psychosocial intervention, natural course of symptoms, or nonspecific benefits of participation in a trial.

Time to Response to Citalopram Treatment for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease.

OBJECTIVE: Agitation is a common and significant problem in Alzheimer disease (AD). In the recent Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer's Disease (CitAD) study, citalopram was efficacious for the treatment of AD agitation. Here we examined the time course and predictors of response to treatment. METHODS: Response in CitAD was defined as a modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study Clinical Global Impression of Change (CGIC) score of 1 or 2 or a Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) score reduction ≥ 50% from baseline. "Stable early response" was defined as meeting the aforementioned criteria at both weeks 3 and 9, "late response" was response at week 9 but not at week 3, and "unstable response" was response at week 3 but not at week 9. RESULTS: In the primary analyses, citalopram was superior to placebo on both the CGIC and the NBRS-A response measures. Little between-group differences were found in response rates in the first 3 weeks of the study (21% versus 19% on the CGIC). Citalopram patients were more likely than placebo patients to be a late responder (18% versus 8% on CGIC, Fisher's exact p = 0.09; 31% versus 15% on NBRS-A, Fisher's exact p = 0.02). Approximately half of citalopram responders (45%-56%) at end of study achieved response later in the study compared with 30%-44% of placebo responders. CONCLUSION: Treatment with citalopram for agitation in AD needs to be at least 9 weeks in duration to allow sufficient time for full response. Study duration is an important factor to consider in the design of clinical trials for agitation in AD.

Changes in QTc interval in the citalopram for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (CitAD) randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: A Food and Drug Administration (FDA) safety communication in August 2011 warned that citalopram was associated with a dose dependent risk of QT prolongation and recommended dose restriction in patients over the age of 60 but did not provide data for this age group. METHODS: CitAD was a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial for agitation in Alzheimer's disease (AD). Participants were assigned to citalopram (target dose of 30 mg/day) or placebo in a 1 ∶ 1 ratio. 186 people, 181 of whom were over the age of 60, having probable AD with clinically significant agitation were recruited from September 2009 to January 2013. After the FDA safety communication about citalopram, ECG was added to the required study procedures before enrollment and repeated at week 3 to monitor change in QTc interval. Forty-eight participants were enrolled after enhanced monitoring began. RESULTS: Citalopram treatment was associated with a larger increase in QTc interval than placebo (difference in week 3 QTc adjusting for baseline QTc: 18.1 ms [95% CI: 6.1, 30.1]; p = 0.004). More participants in the citalopram group had an increase ≥ 30 ms from baseline to week 3 (7 in citalopram versus 1 in placebo; Fisher's exact p = 0.046), but only slightly more in the citalopram group met a gender-specific threshold for prolonged QTc (450 ms for males; 470 ms for females) at any point during follow-up (3 in citalopram versus 1 in placebo, Fisher's exact p = 0.611). One of the citalopram participants who developed prolonged QTc also displayed ventricular bigeminy. No participants in either group had a cardiovascular-related death. CONCLUSION: Citalopram at 30 mg/day was associated with improvement in agitation in patients with AD but was also associated with QT prolongation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00898807.

Effect of citalopram on agitation in Alzheimer disease: the CitAD randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Agitation is common, persistent, and associated with adverse consequences for patients with Alzheimer disease. Pharmacological treatment options, including antipsychotics are not satisfactory. OBJECTIVE: The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of citalopram for agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease. Key secondary objectives examined effects of citalopram on function, caregiver distress, safety, cognitive safety, and tolerability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease Study (CitAD) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial that enrolled 186 patients with probable Alzheimer disease and clinically significant agitation from 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013. INTERVENTIONS: Participants (n = 186) were randomized to receive a psychosocial intervention plus either citalopram (n = 94) or placebo (n = 92) for 9 weeks. Dosage began at 10 mg per day with planned titration to 30 mg per day over 3 weeks based on response and tolerability. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Primary outcome measures were based on scores from the 18-point Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) and the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). Other outcomes were based on scores from the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safety (based on scores from the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events. RESULTS: Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement compared with those who received placebo on both primary outcome measures. The NBRS-A estimated treatment difference at week 9 (citalopram minus placebo) was -0.93 (95% CI, -1.80 to -0.06), P = .04. Results from the mADCS-CGIC showed 40% of citalopram participants having moderate or marked improvement from baseline compared with 26% of placebo recipients, with estimated treatment effect (odds ratio [OR] of being at or better than a given CGIC category) of 2.13 (95% CI, 1.23-3.69), P = .01. Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement on the CMAI, total NPI, and caregiver distress scores but not on the NPI agitation subscale, ADLs, or in less use of rescue lorazepam. Worsening of cognition (-1.05 points; 95% CI, -1.97 to -0.13; P = .03) and QT interval prolongation (18.1 ms; 95% CI, 6.1-30.1; P = .01) were seen in the citalopram group. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00898807.