Vortioxetine, a multimodal antidepressant for generalized anxiety disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Vortioxetine has a beneficial pharmacological profile for reducing anxiety and depression. Recently, a number of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of vortioxetine have been conducted in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD); however, the results from GAD RCTs are inconsistent. With an extensive search of databases and clinical trial registries, four published short-term RCTs were identified and included in the present meta-analysis. The mean change in total scores on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) from baseline was the primary endpoint. The secondary endpoints included the response and remission rates, as defined by a ≥50% reduction in HAMA total scores and a ≤7 change in the HAMA total score at the end of treatment. In addition, the mean change in the HAMA total score from baseline in the subgroup with a HAMA total score ≥25 at baseline was included. Vortioxetine was significantly more effective than was placebo, with a standardized mean difference (SMD) of -0.118 (95% CIs, -0.203 to -0.033, P = 0.007). In particular, those with severe GAD (HAMA total score ≥25 at baseline) had a significantly greater benefit from vortioxetine than those without (SMD = -0.338, 95% CIs = -0.552 to -0.124, p = 0.002). The odds ratios (ORs) for vortioxetine for response and remission were 1.221 (95% CIs, 1.027 to 1.452, P = 0.024) and 1.052 (95% CIs, 0.853 to 1.296, P = 0.637), respectively. Discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs) (OR = 1.560, 1.006 to 2.419, p = 0.047) was marginally higher in vortioxetine than placebo treatment, whereas discontinuation due to any reason (OR = 0.971, 0.794 to 1.187, p = 0.771) and inefficacy (OR = 0.687, 0.380 to 1.243, p = 0.215) were not significantly different among treatment groups. Although our results suggest that vortioxetine may have a potential as an another treatment option for GAD (especially for severe GAD), they should be interpreted and translated into clinical practice with caution, as the meta-analysis was based on a limited number of RCTs.

Vortioxetine: a meta-analysis of 12 short-term, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials for the treatment of major depressive disorder.

BACKGROUND: Vortioxetine was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in September 2013 for treating major depressive disorder (MDD). Thus far, a number of randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials (RCTs) of vortioxetine have been conducted in patients with MDD. We performed a meta-analysis to increase the statistical power of these studies and enhance our current understanding of the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of MDD. METHODS: We performed an extensive search of databases and the clinical trial registry. The mean change in total scores on the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and the Montgomery- Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) from the baseline were the primary outcome measures. The secondary efficacy measures were the response and remission rates, as defined by a 50% or greater reduction in HAM-D/MADRS total scores and as a score of 10 or less in the MADRS and 7 or less in the HAM-D total scores at the end of treatment. RESULTS: We included 7 published and 5 unpublished short-term (6-12 wk) RCTs in our meta-analysis. Vortioxetine was significantly more effective than placebo, with an effect size (standardized mean difference [SMD]) of -0.217 (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.313 to -0.122) and with odds ratios (ORs) for response and remission of 1.652 (95% CI 1.321 to 2.067) and 1.399 (95% CI 1.104 to 1.773), respectively. Those treated with vortioxetine did not differ significantly from those treated with selective norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors/agomelatine with regard to the SMD of the primary outcome measure (0.081, -0.062 to 0.223) or for response (OR 0.815, 95% CI 0.585 to 1.135) and remission (OR 0.843, 95% CI 0.575 to 1.238) rates. Discontinuation owing to lack of efficacy (OR 0.541, 95% CI 0.308 to 0.950) was significantly less common among those treated with vortioxetine than among those who received placebo, whereas discontinuation owing to adverse events (AEs; OR 1.530, 95% CI 1.144 to 2.047) was significantly more common among those treated with vortioxetine than among those receiving placebo. There was no significant difference in discontinuation rates between vortioxetine and comparators owing to inefficacy (OR 0.983, 95% CI 0.585 to 1.650), whereas discontinuation owing to AEs was significantly less common in the vortioxetine than in the comparator group (OR 0.728, 95% CI 0.554 to 0.957). LIMITATIONS: Studies examining the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of MDD are limited. CONCLUSION: Although our results suggest that vortioxetine may be an effective treatment option for MDD, they should be interpreted and translated into clinical practice with caution, as the meta-analysis was based on a limited number of heterogeneous RCTs.

The potential role of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of posttraumatic stress disorder.

Despite the fact that the majority of currently available treatment guidelines propose antidepressants as the first-line pharmacological therapy for posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), a substantial portion of patients fail to show an adequate response following this type of treatment. In this context, a number of small, open-label studies and randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) have found atypical antipsychotics (AAs) to be a beneficial treatment for patients with PTSD. Thus, the present meta-analysis was conducted to enhance the sample size power and further the current understanding of the role of AAs for the treatment of PTSD. An extensive search of several databases identified 12 appropriate RCTs and available data from 9 of these (n = 497) were included in the final meta-analysis. AAs may have potential benefits for the treatment of PTSD as indicated by changes from baseline of the total score on the Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS; standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.289, 95% confidence intervals [CIs] = -0.471, -0.106), P = 0.002). Additionally, AAs were found to be significantly more effective (P < 0.0001) than a placebo in terms of change from baseline for the intrusion sub-score on the CAPS (SMD = -0.373, 95% CIs = -0.568, -0.178) but there were no significant reductions for the avoidance and hyperarousal sub-symptoms. The responder rate and rate of improvement of depressive symptoms were also significantly higher in the AA group than the placebo group (P = 0.004 and P < 0.0001, respectively). However, the present results should be interpreted carefully and be translated into clinical practice only with due consideration of the limited quality and quantity of existing RCTs included in this analysis.

Aripiprazole treatment for patients with schizophrenia: from acute treatment to maintenance treatment.

The most current treatment guidelines for schizophrenia recommend more than 1 year of maintenance therapy after the first psychotic episode, and more than 5 years of maintenance therapy after multiple psychotic episodes. Approximately two-thirds of such patients are known to relapse within 1 year and almost 90% of such patients may recur within 2 years. To maintain adequate consistent treatment, balancing the efficacy and safety/tolerability should be one of the most important clinical issues. In this respect, aripiprazole appears to be a good treatment option owing to its comparable efficacy, favorable safety and tolerability profile, including low incidence of parkinsonian symptoms, lack of prolactin elevation, decreased adrenergic and anticholinergic side effects, less weight gain and low incidence of metabolic syndrome. Hence this article aims to summarize the currently available clinical trial data of aripiprazole published from a number of large-scale randomized controlled studies, including a newer formulation of intramuscular injection as well as a once-monthly intramuscular depot formulation, to update knowledge of treatment options in patients with schizophrenia.

Aripiprazole in the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders: a review of current evidence.

Despite the availability of different classes of drugs for the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders, there are a number of clinically significant unmet needs, such as a high prevalence of treatment resistance, partial response, subsyndromal symptomatology, recurrence and relapse. With the approval of atypical antipsychotics, which are associated with a lower adverse effect burden than typical antipsychotics, consideration of their off-label use for the treatment of affective disorders and various other psychiatric disorders has become a viable option. However, consideration should be given to the US FDA black box warning indicating that atypical antipsychotics may increase mortality risk, particularly in the elderly population with dementia-related psychosis. There has been much conjecture about the utility of these atypical drugs to facilitate traditional antidepressant therapy, either in combination (from the initiation of therapy) or as adjunctive therapy (in the case of partial/incomplete response). Nevertheless, at present, available evidence from randomized, placebo-controlled trials is sparse, and a formal risk/benefit assessment of the use of these agents in a nonpsychotic patient population is not yet possible. As a representative agent from the atypical antipsychotic class with a novel mechanism of action and a relatively low adverse effect burden, aripiprazole represents an interesting potential treatment for depressive and anxiety disorders. In this review, we focus on the rationale for the use of aripiprazole in these disorders. Preclinical data suggests that aripiprazole has a number of possible mechanisms of action that may be important in the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders. Such mechanisms include aripiprazole action at serotonin (5-HT) receptors as a 5-HT1A partial receptor agonist, a 5-HT2C partial receptor agonist and a 5-HT2A receptor antagonist. Aripiprazole also acts as a dopamine D2 partial receptor agonist, and has a possible action at adrenergic receptors. Furthermore, aripiprazole may have possible neuroprotective effects. Clinical studies demonstrate that aripiprazole may be useful in the treatment of bipolar depression, major depressive disorder, treatment-resistant depression and possibly anxiety disorders. Clinical data also suggest that aripiprazole may have a lower adverse effect burden than the other atypical drugs. Future research may confirm the potential utility of aripiprazole in the treatment of depressive and anxiety disorders.