Adjunctive brexpiprazole 1 and 3 mg for patients with major depressive disorder following inadequate response to antidepressants: a phase 3, randomized, double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate efficacy, safety, and tolerability of brexpiprazole adjunctive to antidepressant treatments (ADTs) in patients with major depressive disorder (as defined by DSM-IV-TR criteria) with inadequate response to ADTs. METHOD Patients still depressed despite 1-3 prior ADTs followed by 8 weeks of prospective physician-determined, open-label ADT were randomized (1:1:1) to double-blind brexpiprazole 3 mg/d, brexpiprazole 1 mg/d, or placebo for 6 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score from baseline to week 6. The key secondary efficacy end point was change in Sheehan Disability Scale mean score. The Hochberg procedure corrected for multiplicity. The efficacy population comprised all patients who had ≥ 1 dose of study drug with baseline and ≥ 1 postrandomization MADRS scores; the efficacy population per final protocol consisted of efficacy population patients meeting amended criteria for inadequate response throughout the 8-week prospective ADT. The study was conducted between June 2011 and September 2013. RESULTS In the efficacy population per final protocol, brexpiprazole 3 mg (n = 213) showed a greater improvement in MADRS total score versus placebo (n = 203; -8.29 vs -6.33; P = .0079), whereas brexpiprazole 1 mg did not (n = 211; -7.64 vs -6.33; P = .0737). The brexpiprazole groups showed comparable improvement in SDS mean score versus placebo (least squares [LS] mean difference: [1 mg] -0.49, P = .0158; [3 mg] -0.48, P = .0191). The most frequent adverse events were akathisia (4.4%, 13.5%, 2.3%), headache (9.3%, 6.1%, 7.7%), and weight increase (6.6%, 5.7%, 0.9%) in brexpiprazole 1-mg, 3-mg, and placebo groups, respectively. Mean changes from baseline in Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (LS mean difference = 0.08, P = .0141) and Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (LS mean difference = 0.17, P = .0001) total scores were significantly greater with brexpiprazole 3 mg versus placebo. CONCLUSIONS Brexpiprazole 3 mg demonstrated efficacy versus placebo in the efficacy population per final protocol. Both doses of brexpiprazole were well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01360632.

[1]  M. Thase.  Adjunctive Therapy With Second-Generation Antipsychotics: The New Standard for Treatment-Resistant Depression? , 2016, Focus.

[2]  M. Thase,et al.  Efficacy and safety of adjunctive brexpiprazole 2 mg in major depressive disorder: a phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled study in patients with inadequate response to antidepressants. , 2015, The Journal of clinical psychiatry.

[3]  Tine Bryan Stensbøl,et al.  Brexpiprazole I: In Vitro and In Vivo Characterization of a Novel Serotonin-Dopamine Activity Modulator , 2014, The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics.

[4]  G. Freedman,et al.  Burden of Depressive Disorders by Country, Sex, Age, and Year: Findings from the Global Burden of Disease Study 2010 , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[5]  N. Olchanski,et al.  The economic burden of treatment-resistant depression. , 2013, Clinical therapeutics.

[6]  B. Wright,et al.  Augmentation with Atypical Antipsychotics for Depression: A Review of Evidence‐Based Support from the Medical Literature , 2013, Pharmacotherapy.

[7]  E. Linardatos,et al.  Adjunctive Atypical Antipsychotic Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Depression, Quality of Life, and Safety Outcomes , 2013, PLoS medicine.

[8]  T. Vos,et al.  Global variation in the prevalence and incidence of major depressive disorder: a systematic review of the epidemiological literature , 2012, Psychological Medicine.

[9]  R. Kessler.  The costs of depression. , 2012, The Psychiatric clinics of North America.

[10]  Barbara Stanley,et al.  The Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale: initial validity and internal consistency findings from three multisite studies with adolescents and adults. , 2011, The American journal of psychiatry.

[11]  M. Fava,et al.  RESEARCH: Validation of the Massachusetts General Hospital Antidepressant Treatment History Questionnaire (ATRQ) , 2010, CNS neuroscience & therapeutics.

[12]  H. Eriksson,et al.  Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder (MDD) in patients with an inadequate response to ongoing antidepressant treatment: a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. , 2010, The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology.

[13]  J. Nelson,et al.  Atypical antipsychotic augmentation in major depressive disorder: a meta-analysis of placebo-controlled randomized trials. , 2009, The American journal of psychiatry.

[14]  H. Möller,et al.  Is the significant superiority of escitalopram compared with other antidepressants clinically relevant? , 2009, International clinical psychopharmacology.

[15]  E. Constant,et al.  Extended-release quetiapine as adjunct to an antidepressant in patients with major depressive disorder: results of a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. , 2009, The Journal of clinical psychiatry.

[16]  M. Fava,et al.  Aripiprazole Augmentation in Major Depressive Disorder: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study in Patients with Inadequate Response to Antidepressants , 2009, CNS Spectrums.

[17]  M. Fava,et al.  The Efficacy and Safety of Aripiprazole as Adjunctive Therapy in Major Depressive Disorder: A Second Multicenter, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study , 2008, Journal of clinical psychopharmacology.

[18]  B. Fantino,et al.  The clinical relevance of changes in the Montgomery–Asberg Depression Rating Scale using the minimum clinically important difference approach , 2008 .

[19]  K. Kobak,et al.  Development and reliability of a structured interview guide for the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (SIGMA) , 2008, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[20]  H. Möller.  Outcomes in major depressive disorder: The evolving concept of remission and its implications for treatment , 2008, The world journal of biological psychiatry : the official journal of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry.

[21]  R. Berman,et al.  The efficacy and safety of aripiprazole as adjunctive therapy in major depressive disorder: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. , 2007, The Journal of clinical psychiatry.

[22]  S. Riedel-Heller,et al.  Cost-of-illness studies of depression: a systematic review. , 2007, Journal of affective disorders.

[23]  A. Lewy,et al.  Practice Guideline for the Treatment of Patients With Major Depressive Disorder, 2nd ed. , 2002 .

[24]  R. Sysko,et al.  Placebo response in studies of major depression: variable, substantial, and growing. , 2002, JAMA.

[25]  D. Sheehan,et al.  The measurement of disability. , 1996 .

[26]  A. Rush,et al.  The Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology (IDS): psychometric properties , 1996, Psychological Medicine.

[27]  T. Barnes.  A Rating Scale for Drug-Induced Akathisia , 1989, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[28]  D. Sheehan,et al.  The Anxiety Disease , 1984 .

[29]  M. Åsberg,et al.  A New Depression Scale Designed to be Sensitive to Change , 1979, British Journal of Psychiatry.

[30]  G. Simpson,et al.  A RATING SCALE FOR EXTRAPYRAMIDAL SIDE EFFECTS , 1970, Acta psychiatrica Scandinavica. Supplementum.

[31]  M. Hamilton,et al.  Development of a rating scale for primary depressive illness. , 1967, The British journal of social and clinical psychology.

[32]  M. Hamilton.  A RATING SCALE FOR DEPRESSION , 1960, Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry.

[33]  M. Hamilton.  The assessment of anxiety states by rating. , 1959, The British journal of medical psychology.

[34]  Michael E. Thase,et al.  If at First You Don’t Succeed , 2012, Drugs.

[35]  M. Thase,et al.  A systematic review of augmentation strategies for patients with major depressive disorder. , 2009, Psychopharmacology bulletin.