Determinants of antidepressant response: Implications for practice and future clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Response to antidepressants in major depressive disorder is variable and determinants are not well understood or used to design clinical trials. We aimed to understand these determinants. METHODS: Supported by Innovative Medicines Initiative, as part of a large public-private collaboration (NEWMEDS), we assembled the largest dataset of individual patient level information from industry sponsored randomized placebo-controlled trials of antidepressant drugs in adults with MDD. We examined patient and trial-design-related determinants of outcome as measured by change on Hamilton Depression Scale or Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale in 34 placebo-controlled trials (drug, n = 8260; placebo, n = 3957). RESULTS: While it is conventional for trials to be 6-8 weeks long, drug-placebo differences were nearly the same at week 4 as at week 6 and with lower dropout rates. At the multivariate level, having any of these attributes was significantly associated with greater drug vs. placebo differences on symptom improvement: female, increasing proportion of patients on placebo, centers located outside of North America, centers with low placebo response (regardless of active treatment response) and using randomized withdrawal designs. LIMITATIONS: Data on compounds that failed were not available to us. Findings may not be relevant for new mechanisms of action. CONCLUSIONS: Proof of concept trials can be shorter and efficiency improved by selecting enriched populations based on clinical and demographic variables, ensuring adequate balance of placebo patients, and carefully selecting and monitoring centers. In addition to improving drug discovery, patient exposure to placebo and experimental treatments can be reduced.

Initial depression severity and response to antidepressants v. placebo: patient-level data analysis from 34 randomised controlled trials.

Several often-cited meta-analyses have reported that the efficacy of antidepressant medications depends on the severity of depression. They found that drug-placebo differences increased as a function of initial severity, which was attributed to decreased responsiveness to placebo among patients with severe depression rather than to increased responsiveness to medication. We retested this using patient-level data and also undertaking a meta-analysis of trial-level data from 34 randomised placebo controlled trials (n = 10 737) from the NEWMEDS registry. Although our trial-level data support prevous findings, patient-level data did not show any significant effect of initial depression severity on drug v. placebo difference.

Determinants of antipsychotic response in schizophrenia: implications for practice and future clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Response to antipsychotics in schizophrenia is highly variable, and determinants are not well understood or used to design clinical trials. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to understand determinants of response to antipsychotic treatment. METHOD: Supported by the Innovative Medicines Initiative, as part of a large public-private collaboration (NEWMEDS), we assembled the largest dataset of individual patient level information from randomized placebo-controlled trials of second-generation antipsychotics conducted in adult schizophrenia patients by 5 large pharmaceutical companies. The dataset included all placebo-controlled trials of risperidone, paliperidone, ziprasidone, sertindole, olanzapine, and quetiapine. We examined patient and trial-design-related determinants of outcome as measured by change on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale in 29 placebo-controlled trials (drug, n =6,971; placebo, n = 2,200) and initial findings confirmed in additional data from 5 separate trials (drug, n =1,699; placebo, n = 580). RESULTS: While it is conventional for trials to be 6 weeks long, drug-placebo differences were observable at week 4 with nearly the same sensitivity, and dropout rates were lower. Having any of these attributes was associated with significantly greater drug versus placebo differences in symptom improvement and rates of study completion: being female (P ≤ .04), being a young adult patient who is a few years beyond the first episode (P ≤ .03), having prominent positive and negative symptoms (P ≤ .03), and living in Eastern Europe versus North America (P ≤ .04). Contrary to prevalent clinical opinion, age at onset and use of benzodiazepines did not show a differential treatment response, and patients just above PANSS inclusion threshold were not overrepresented. CONCLUSIONS: Proof-of-concept trials can be shorter and efficiency improved by including an even distribution of sexes and of patients with prominent symptomatology, thus reducing patient exposure to placebo and experimental treatments.

The effect of ziprasidone on metabolic syndrome risk factors in subjects with schizophrenia: a 1 year, open-label, prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: Metabolic syndrome (MetS) is prevalent in subjects with schizophrenia-related psychotic disorders and contributes to increased rates of premature death due to cardiovascular disease. This study examined the impact of switching from another antipsychotic to ziprasidone on the distribution of the number of risk factors for MetS in subjects with schizophrenia or related psychotic disorders. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this 1 year, open-label, prospective study, all subjects received ziprasidone 40-160 mg/day. Standard exclusion criteria included treatment resistance, physical health disorders, and substance abuse. The primary end point was the percentage of subjects achieving a reduction from baseline of at least one risk factor for MetS at end point (week 52 or premature discontinuation) in the per-protocol population (treated for at least 16 weeks). Secondary end points included the mean change from baseline in number of MetS risk factors, the prevalence of MetS, individual MetS risk factors (waist circumference, blood pressure, fasting triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and glucose), and 10 year coronary heart disease (Framingham score) risk. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00748566. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Of 114 evaluable subjects, 58.77% demonstrated one less MetS risk factor at week 52 (last observation carried forward) compared with baseline. Secondary end points also improved, with reductions in other metabolic parameters (fasting low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, total cholesterol and serum insulin, weight, body mass index and glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c]). The 10 year coronary heart disease risk decreased continually over time. The open-label and uncontrolled design is a limitation of the study. CONCLUSIONS: Ziprasidone treatment reduced both the rate of MetS and its individual risk factors in subjects with schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders. The results have implications for the selection of first-line treatments in schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders, and provide treatment options for subjects who have developed MetS as a result of other antipsychotics.

Post hoc analysis of nutritional status in patients with transthyretin familial amyloid polyneuropathy: impact of tafamidis.

INTRODUCTION: Gastrointestinal symptoms are common among patients with transthyretin familial amyloid polyneuropathy (TTR-FAP). This post hoc analysis evaluated the nutritional status of TTR-FAP patients treated with tafamidis while enrolled in clinical trials. METHODS: Nutritional status was measured by the modified body mass index (mBMI = BMI × albumin level). Treatment-related changes in mBMI were reported for 71 Val30Met TTR-FAP patients who completed an 18-month, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial and who continued into its open-label, 12-month extension. RESULTS: At month 18, mBMI worsened in the placebo group (n = 33) (-33 ± 16 kg/m(2) g/l, P = 0.04 versus baseline) but improved in the tafamidis group (n = 38) (+37 ± 14 kg/m(2) g/l, P = 0.01 versus baseline) such that the effect size between the groups was statistically significant (P = 0.001). By month 30 (completion of the open-label extension), placebo patients with 12 months of tafamidis treatment and tafamidis-treated patients with 30 months of treatment both tended to increase their mBMI (28 ± 19 kg/m(2) g/l and 16 ± 18 kg/m(2) g/l, respectively). Increase in BMI was most pronounced in patients with low BMI at entry into the studies. CONCLUSIONS: mBMI is well suited to monitor disease progression in TTR-FAP patients. The delay in neurological deterioration brought about by tafamidis treatment in clinical trials is associated with improvements in, or maintenance of, mBMI. FUNDING: This study was sponsored by Pfizer Inc., New York, USA.

Combining efficacy and completion rates with no data imputation: a composite approach with greater sensitivity for the statistical evaluation of active comparisons in antipsychotic trials.

Outcomes in RCT's of antipsychotic medications are often examined using last observation carried forward (LOCF) and mixed effect models (MMRM), these ignore meaning of non-completion and thus rely on questionable assumptions. We tested an approach that combines into a single statistic, the drug effect in those who complete trial and proportion of patients in each treatment group who complete trial. This approach offers a conceptually and clinically meaningful endpoint. Composite approach was compared to LOCF (ANCOVA) and MMRM in 59 industry sponsored RCT's. For within study comparisons we computed effect size (z-score) and p values for (a) rates of completion, (b) symptom change for complete cases, which were combined into composite statistic, and (c) symptom change for all cases using last observation forward (LOCF). In the 30 active comparator studies, composite approach detected larger differences in effect size than LOCF (ES=.05) and MMRM (ES=.076). In 10 of the 49 comparisons composite lead to significant differences (p ≤ .05) where LOCF and MMRM did not. In 3 comparisons LOCF was significant, in 2 MMRM lead to significant differences whereas composite did not. In placebo controlled trials, there was no meaningful difference in effect size between composite and LOCF and MMRM when comparing placebo to active treatment, however composite detected greater differences than other approaches when comparing between active treatments. Composite was more sensitive to effects of experimental treatment vs. active controls (but not placebo) than LOCF and MMRM thereby increasing study power while answering a more relevant question.

Negative symptoms in schizophrenia--the remarkable impact of inclusion definitions in clinical trials and their consequences.

BACKGROUND: Negative symptoms are an important target for intervention in schizophrenia. There is lack of clarity in defining appropriate patients for negative symptom trials. While regulators, drug developers and academics have expressed positions in this regard, the implications of these definitions are not yet tested in large-scale trials and there is no consensus. OBJECTIVES: We examined the extent to which various operational criteria for inclusion in negative symptoms in schizophrenia clinical trials can impact patient selection and examined the effectiveness of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in patients with various degrees of negative symptoms. METHOD: Using anonymized patient data from AstraZeneca, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck, and Pfizer from 20 placebo-controlled trials of SGAs in schizophrenia from the NewMeds repository, we applied different criteria for negative symptoms: prominent, predominant, and EMA criteria, which require predominant and core negative symptoms to be present and examined the impact of these on inclusion and outcome. RESULTS: Operational criteria for negative symptoms in trials vary greatly in their inclusion of patients from "typical" trial samples. Of the patients in our studies, 8.1% and 62.3% met criteria for prominent negative symptoms, 10.2% to 50.2% met criteria for predominant negative symptoms and 7.6% to 40.0% met EMA criteria at baseline. After 6weeks of active treatment, 8% and 33.1% of patients met criteria for prominent residual negative symptoms and 14.9% to 65% met criteria for prominent and 12.2% to 45.5% met EMA criteria. Patients with predominant or prominent negative symptoms showed marked improvement on second generation antipsychotics. CONCLUSIONS: Applying various operational criteria for selecting patients for negative symptoms trials provides a great variability in percentage of suitable patients calling into question the extent to which some definitions may be overly narrow.

Achieving and sustaining remission in bipolar I disorder with ziprasidone : a post hoc analysis of a 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: A number of operational definitions have been proposed to describe outcomes in bipolar disorders; the criteria used to define terms such as recurrence, relapse, response, remission and recovery have varied both in observational studies and in clinical trials. We carried out a post hoc analysis of rates of symptomatic point remission and sustained remission using four different remission criteria that had been evaluated in a previously published 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. METHODS: After stabilization for 8 consecutive weeks on open-label ziprasidone plus lithium or valproate, stabilized subjects were randomized to two groups, ziprasidone with lithium or valproate (ziprasidone group), or placebo with lithium or valproate (placebo group) for 16 weeks. Four remission criteria included (i) Mania Rating Scale (MRS) score ≤7, (ii) MRS ≤7 + Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score ≤10, (iii) MRS ≤7 + Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) = 1, (iv) MRS score ≤7 + MADRS score ≤10 + CGI-I score = 1. We examined the percentages of subjects in each treatment group achieving symptomatic point (i.e. at each visit) and sustained (i.e. for ≥8 weeks) remission during the double-blind phase. RESULTS: At week 24, symptomatic point remission based on the above two more stringent criteria was achieved by 48.0 and 24.4% of the ziprasidone group versus 36.9 and 18.0% of placebo recipients, respectively (p = 0.04 and 0.14). Sustained remission rates at 24 weeks were 42.5 and 18.1% for ziprasidone, respectively (vs 33.3 and 14.4% for placebo, p = 0.04 and 0.21, respectively). CONCLUSION: This analysis indicates that ziprasidone plus lithium or valproate treatment showed modest to moderate remission rates at week 24 based on four different remission criteria in terms of symptomatic and sustained remission, despite the stringent criteria. Our findings indicate that ziprasidone may be effective in achieving sustained remission in bipolar I disorder and propose that a better understanding regarding the definition of remission in bipolar disorders should be required in clinical practice since our results showed different remission rates with different remission criteria.

Switching from long-term benzodiazepine therapy to pregabalin in patients with generalized anxiety disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

To evaluate the efficacy of pregabalin in facilitating taper off chronic benzodiazepines, outpatients (N = 106) with a lifetime diagnosis of generalized anxiety disorder (current diagnosis could be subthreshold) who had been treated with a benzodiazepine for 8-52 weeks were stabilized for 2-4 weeks on alprazolam in the range of 1-4 mg/day. Patients were then randomized to 12 weeks of double-blind treatment with either pregabalin 300-600 mg/day or placebo while undergoing a gradual benzodiazepine taper at a rate of 25% per week, followed by a 6-week benzodiazepine-free phase during which they continued double-blind study treatment. Outcome measures included ability to remain benzodiazepine-free (primary) as well as changes in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM)-A and Physician Withdrawal Checklist (PWC). At endpoint, a non-significant higher proportion of patients remained benzodiazepine-free receiving pregabalin compared with placebo (51.4% vs 37.0%). Treatment with pregabalin was associated with significantly greater endpoint reduction in the HAM-A total score versus placebo (-2.5 vs +1.3; p < 0.001), and lower endpoint mean PWC scores (6.5 vs 10.3; p = 0.012). Thirty patients (53%) in the pregabalin group and 19 patients (37%) in the placebo group completed the study, reducing the power to detect a significant difference on the primary outcome. The results on the anxiety and withdrawal severity measures suggest that switching to pregabalin may be a safe and effective method for discontinuing long-term benzodiazepine therapy.

Impact of geographical and cultural factors on clinical trials in acute mania: lessons from a ziprasidone and haloperidol placebo-controlled study.

Clinical trials today are conducted in multiple countries to enhance patient recruitment and improve efficiency of trials. However, the demographic and cultural diversity may contribute to variations in study outcomes. Here we conducted post-hoc analyses for a placebo-controlled study with ziprasidone and haloperidol for the treatment of acute mania to address the demographic, dosing, and outcome disparities in India, Russia and the USA. We compared the baseline characteristics, outcomes and discontinuations in patients and explored the relationship between the outcome measures across these countries. We found substantial differences in baseline characteristics of subjects, administered dosage and disease severity in India compared to the USA and Russia. Conversely, US subjects had a higher placebo response compared to subjects in Russia and India. These results are probably due to demographic differences in patient populations and psychiatric clinical practice across countries. While we offer initial ideas to address the disparities identified in this analysis, it is clear that further research to improve our understanding of geographical differences is essential to ensure globally applicable results for clinical trials in psychiatry.

Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) as a valid proxy measure for remission in schizophrenia: analyses of ziprasidone clinical study data.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the degree to which a proxy measure of remission in schizophrenia correlates with the criteria identified by the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group, and how well early treatment response to ziprasidone predicts remission. METHODS: Data from 10 ziprasidone studies were analyzed to determine rates of remission achieved with ziprasidone using a remission definition of Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) of 1, and compared with rates of remission achieved using the remission working group criteria. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores were then investigated as predictors of remission. RESULTS: A CGI-I score of 1 correlated with the remission criteria developed by the remission working group. In the combined ziprasidone arms, BPRS scores at Weeks 1, 3, and 4 successfully predicted PANSS remission (p<0.01) and BPRS remission (p<0.0001) at study endpoint (44-196weeks). PANSS scores (at Weeks 1, 3, and 4) successfully predicted PANSS remission (p<0.01) at study endpoint. PANSS scores at Week 3 successfully predicted BPRS remission (p=0.02) at study endpoint. A CGI-I score of 1 or 2 at Week 1 also successfully predicted remission in schizophrenia. CONCLUSION: The findings show a correlation between clinical and research scales (remission working group criteria) for the assessment of remission in schizophrenia. This proxy measure for the assessment of remission should be easy to apply in a clinical setting and facilitates the prediction of remission in schizophrenia.

The efficacy of pregabalin and benzodiazepines in generalized anxiety disorder presenting with high levels of insomnia.

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of high levels of insomnia on response to pregabalin (PGB) in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Pooled data were analyzed from six double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4- to 6-week trials of outpatients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fourth edition) criteria for GAD with a minimum Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) score = 18. Response was evaluated for three fixed-dose PGB groups (150, 300-450, 600 mg/day), and for a benzodiazepine group (alprazolam or lorazepam). A 'high-insomnia' subgroup was defined by a baseline HAM for Depression (HAM-D) insomnia factor score greater than 3 (maximum = 6). At baseline, 1002 (54%) patients met the criteria for the high-insomnia subgroup, and 852 (46%) for the low-insomnia subgroup. Mean baseline HAM-A scores were 1-2 points higher in high-insomnia versus low-insomnia patients. In high-insomnia patients, PGB produced significantly greater improvement in HAM-A total scores at last observation carried forward endpoint on 300-450 mg (-13.1+/-0.6) and 600 mg (-11.2+/-0.5) dose groups compared with placebo (-8.3+/-0.5; P<0.0001 for both comparisons); the improvement on PGB 150 mg was not significant (-9.9+/-0.7; P = 0.051). Improvement was significant in the benzodiazepine group (-11.0+/-0.6; P<0.0001). In the high-insomnia subgroup, treatment with PGB significantly (P<0.001) improved the HAM-D insomnia factor scores on both the 300-450 mg (-2.73) and 600 mg (-2.35) doses, and on benzodiazepines (-2.52) compared with placebo (-1.51); improvement on PGB 150 mg (-1.69) was not significant. Rates of treatment-emergent insomnia were lower on PGB compared with placebo in both the high- and low-insomnia subgroups. In conclusion, PGB was well tolerated, and improved overall anxiety symptoms, while specifically improving insomnia in patients with GAD presenting with high levels of concurrent insomnia.

Impact of gastrointestinal symptoms on response to pregabalin in generalized anxiety disorder: results of a six-study combined analysis.

The objective of the study was to evaluate the response of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) patients with prominent gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms to pregabalin (PGB) treatment. Data were pooled from six double-blind, placebo (PBO)-controlled, 4-6 week trials in outpatients who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition criteria for GAD with a minimum Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score of 20. Treatment response was evaluated for three PGB fixed-dosage groups: 150, 300-450, and 600 mg/day, and for fixed doses of a benzodiazepine (alprazolam, 1.5 mg/day; lorazepam, 6 mg/day). A GI-high subgroup (high GI symptomatology) was defined by a baseline HAM-A item-11 (GI) score of 3 or greater (severe/very severe). At baseline, 301 patients (16.2%) met criteria for the GI-high subgroup. Baseline characteristics were approximately similar for the four study treatments in the GI-high subgroup. For the GI-high subgroup, last observation carried forward (LOCF) endpoint reduction in HAM-A was significantly higher on PGB-300/450 -13.8+/-1.2 and PGB-600 -14.7+/-1.0 compared with PBO -10.1+/-0.9 (P<0.01 for both comparisons); but the difference on PGB-150 did not achieve significance (-13.5+/-1.6; P=0.083). Also in the GI-high subgroup, endpoint reduction in HAM-A item-11 was significantly higher on PGB-300/450 compared with PBO (-1.93+/-0.16 vs. -1.52+/-0.13; P=0.04), but did not achieve significance on PGB-600 mg (-1.89+/-0.14; P=0.06), or PGB-150 mg (-1.90+/-0.23; P=0.16). In the GI-high subgroup, treatment with a benzodiazepine was not associated with significant endpoint reduction in either the HAM-A total score or the HAM-A item-11 score. Patients in the GI-high subgroup had higher discontinuation rates when treated with benzodiazepines, whereas treatment with PGB 300-600 mg/day was not associated with treatment-emergent worsening in GI symptoms compared with placebo. Treatment with PGB improved overall levels of anxiety, as well as specifically improving GI symptoms.

A comparison of ziprasidone and risperidone in the long-term treatment of schizophrenia: a 44-week, double-blind, continuation study.

OBJECTIVE: This randomized, double-blind, multicentre extension study compared the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of ziprasidone and risperidone for schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. METHODS: Patients who had responded to treatment for an acute exacerbation of illness in an 8-week study received ziprasidone, 80 to 160 mg/day (n = 62), or risperidone, 6 to 10 mg/day (n = 77), for up to 44 additional weeks. Primary efficacy variables included changes in Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score and Clinical Global Impression Severity (CGI-S) score. Tolerability and safety assessments included movement disorders, adverse events, study discontinuation rates, and weight and metabolic parameters. RESULTS: Both the ziprasidone and risperidone groups showed statistical improvement from baseline in PANSS and CGI-S scores at study end point with no significant differences between treatment groups. More risperidone-treated patients completed the study (41.6%) than ziprasidone-treated patients (33.9%), but the difference was not statistically significant. Ziprasidone-treated patients who completed the study showed greater improvement in depressive symptoms assessed by Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale than risperidone-treated patients (P < 0.05). Ziprasidone was associated with a more favourable effect on extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) measures and prolactin as well as less weight gain than risperidone. Median dosages were ziprasidone 120 mg/day and risperidone 8 mg/day. CONCLUSIONS: Ziprasidone and risperidone demonstrated similar efficacy during long-term treatment of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. While more subjects on risperidone completed the extension study, ziprasidone was associated with fewer adverse effects on weight, EPS measures, and prolactin than risperidone.

Efficacy of pregabalin and venlafaxine-XR in generalized anxiety disorder: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week trial.

The objective of this study was to evaluate the anxiolytic efficacy, and speed of onset of efficacy, of pregabalin (PGB) and venlafaxine-XR (VXR) in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). In this double-blind trial, outpatients, ages 18-65 years, who met Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, criteria for GAD were randomized to 8 weeks of flexible-dose treatment with PGB (300-600 mg/day), VXR (75-225 mg/day), or placebo (PBO). The intent-to-treat sample consisted of 121 patients on PGB [least square (LS) mean ± SE baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), 27.6 ± 0.4], 125 patients on VXR (baseline HAM-A, 27.4 ± 0.4), and 128 patients on PBO (baseline HAM-A, 26.8 ± 0.4). Treatment with PGB was associated with a significantly greater LS mean change in the HAM-A total score at last observation carried forward endpoint versus PBO (-14.5 ± 0.9 vs. -11.7 ± 0.9; P = 0.028). Treatment with VXR was not significant versus PBO at endpoint (-12.0 ± 0.9; -11.7 ± 0.9; P =0.968). Treatment with PGB showed an early onset of improvement, with significantly greater LS mean change in the HAM-A by day 4 versus both PBO (-5.3 ± 0.5 vs. -3.4± 0.5; P = 0.008) and VXR (-2.9 ± 0.5; P = 0.0012). The proportion of patients reporting a severe adverse event was similar for PGB (9.1%) and PBO (7.8%), but higher for VXR (20.0%; P < 0.05). In conclusion, PGB was a safe and effective treatment of GAD, with a significantly earlier onset of anxiolytic activity than VXR.

Efficacy of pregabalin in depressive symptoms associated with generalized anxiety disorder: a pooled analysis of 6 studies.

Epidemiological evidence supports comorbidity of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and major depressive disorder (MDD) or dysthymia, and its association with significant disability. As pregabalin, a new alpha(2)-delta anxiolytic treatment for GAD, unlike most other licensed treatments for GAD has not undergone investigation in patients with MDD, we examined its efficacy in depressive symptoms associated with GAD, through a post-hoc analysis of the existing clinical trial database. The results provide consistent evidence that in patients with GAD pregabalin reduced associated symptoms of depression. This was seen in the 150 mg/day, 300-450 mg/day and 600 mg/day dosing groups. Even in subjects with more prominent depressive symptoms, pregabalin remained effective for both sub-syndromal depression and GAD symptoms, with pregabalin 300-450 mg/day demonstrating the most beneficial response. In conclusion, pregabalin, an alternative treatment option for GAD with a novel mechanism of action, also demonstrated efficacy in treating depressive symptoms typically encountered in GAD patients.

Efficacy of ziprasidone against hostility in schizophrenia: Post hoc analysis of randomized, open-label study data.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to determine the effects of sequential intramuscular/oral ziprasi-done on hostility. METHOD: A total of 572 inpatients diagnosed with DSM-IV schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were the subjects in a randomized, rater-blinded, 6-week, open-label study comparing sequential intramuscular and oral ziprasidone with haloperidol. The Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) was the principal outcome measure. To determine the effect of ziprasidone on hostility, post hoc analyses of scores on the hostility item from the BPRS were conducted. Introducing positive symptoms and akathisia as covariates tested specific antihostility effect. The study was conducted from October 23, 1998, to August 15, 2000. RESULTS: Ziprasidone demonstrated specific antihostility effects over time throughout the 42-day study period and statistically significant superiority to haloperidol on this measure in the first week of treatment (p = .0149 at first evaluation [day 1, 2, or 3]; p = .0358 at day 7). CONCLUSION: Ziprasidone is an effective treatment for hostility in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.

High-dose sertraline strategy for nonresponders to acute treatment for obsessive-compulsive disorder: a multicenter double-blind trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of high-dose sertraline for patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) who failed to respond to standard sertraline acute treatment. METHOD: Sixty-six nonresponders to 16 weeks of sertraline treatment who met DSM-III-R criteria for current OCD were randomly assigned, in a double-blind continuation phase of a multicenter trial, either to continue on 200 mg/day of sertraline or to increase their dose to between 250 and 400 mg/day for 12 additional weeks. Efficacy measures included the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), the National Institute of Mental Health Global Obsessive Compulsive Scale (NIMH Global OC Scale), and the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness and -Improvement (CGI-I) scales. Data were collected from July 26, 1994, to October 26, 1995. RESULTS: The high-dose (250-400 mg/day, mean final dose = 357, SD = 60, N = 30) group showed significantly greater symptom improvement than the 200-mg/day group (N = 36) as measured by the YBOCS (p = .033), NIMH Global OC Scale (p = .003), and CGI-I (p = .011). Responder rates (decrease in YBOCS score of > or = 25% and a CGI-I rating < or = 3) were not significantly different for the 200-mg/day versus the high-dose sertraline group, either on completer analysis, 34% versus 52%, or on endpoint analysis, 33% versus 40%. Both treatments showed similar adverse event rates. CONCLUSION: Greater symptom improvement was seen in the high-dose sertraline group compared to the 200-mg/day dose group during continuation treatment. Both dosages yielded similar safety profiles. Administration of higher than labeled doses of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors may be a treatment option for certain OCD patients who fail to respond to standard acute treatment.

Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of sertraline in patients with late-life depression and comorbid medical illness.

OBJECTIVES: To report on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of sertraline in the treatment of elderly depres-sed patients with and without comorbid medical illness. SETTING: Multicenter. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 752 patients aged 60 and older with diagnosis of major depressive disorder according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, diagnosis. MEASUREMENTS: Outcome measures included the 17-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD); the Clinical Global Depression-Severity/Improvement (CGI-S/CGI-I); efficacy and safety/adverse event assessments; Quality of Life, Enjoyment, and Satisfaction Questionnaire; and the Medical Outcomes Study 36-Item Short-Form Health Status Survey. RESULTS: In the overall sample, sertraline was superior to placebo on all three primary outcome measures, HAMD, and overall clinical severity and change (CGI-S/CGI-I). Furthermore, therapeutic response to sertraline was comparable in those with or without medical comorbidity, and there were no treatment-by-comorbidity group interactions. Sertraline was also associated with a faster time to response than placebo in the comorbid group (P<.006). Sertraline-treated patients in the comorbid group had similar adverse events and discontinuations when compared to those in the noncomorbid group. CONCLUSION: Sertraline was efficacious in reducing depressive symptomatology, regardless of the presence of comorbid medical illness. Sertraline was safe and well tolerated by patients with or without medical illness.

Interactional effects of marital status and physical abuse on adolescent psychopathology.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore the interactional effects of parental marital disruption and physical abuse on risk for adolescent psychopathology in a nonclinical sample with a randomly selected control group. METHOD: The sample was drawn from 99 community-based adolescents indicated as physically abused by Child Protective Services and 99 randomly selected controls. Nonabused adolescents whose parents were married, abused adolescents whose parents were married, nonabused adolescents with a parental marital disruption, and abused adolescents with a parental marital disruption were compared. Outcome was psychopathology as measured by psychiatric diagnosis based on a best-estimate procedure subsequent to semistructured diagnostic interviewing. RESULTS: Interactional effects of marital disruption and abuse were found for risk for lifetime Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), with parental marital disruption and having been physically abused combining to increase the risk 15 times for diagnosis of lifetime ADHD. Parental marital status alone was not a significant risk factor for adolescent psychopathology, but physical abuse was a significant risk factor for several diagnostic categories. CONCLUSIONS: Future divorce research should include abuse history as a possible confounding variable. Possible reasons for the findings are reviewed and clinical implications are discussed.