Gary S Sachs 1 , Kathleen S Ice , Phillip B Chappell , Jeffrey H Schwartz , Oksana Gurtovaya , Douglas G Vanderburg , Bryce Kasuba . Show Affiliations »
Abstract
Show RCT »
Hide RCT «
OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of adjunctive ziprasidone in subjects with bipolar depression treated with lithium, lamotrigine, or valproate . METHOD: 298 adult outpatients with bipolar I disorder (DSM-IV criteria ) were randomized to receive ziprasidone, 20-80 mg twice a day, or placebo twice a day for 6 weeks plus their preexisting mood stabilizer. The primary efficacy variable was change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores from baseline to 6 weeks. The key secondary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 6 in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scores . Computer-administered assessments for diagnostic confidence were included for quality control and to evaluate study performance. The study was conducted between October 2007 and December 2008 . RESULTS: The mean ± SD daily dose of ziprasidone was 89.8 ± 29.1 mg. Least squares mean ± standard error changes from baseline to week 6 on MADRS total score for ziprasidone and placebo treatment groups were -13.2 ± 1.2 and -12.9 ± 1.1, respectively, with a 2-sided P value of .792. There was no significant difference on the key secondary variable (CGI-S). Adjunctive ziprasidone was well tolerated . Poor quality ratings at baseline were associated with a trend for better improvement on placebo than ziprasidone . Among 43 placebo -treated subjects with poor baseline quality ratings, 29 (67.4%) had baseline MADRS scores > 10 points higher on the computer-administered assessment than the MADRS administered by the site-based rater. The response favoring placebo over ziprasidone observed in this subgroup suggests that poor signal detection in some clinical trials can be a consequence of "subject inflation" as well as "rater inflation." CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive ziprasidone treatment failed to separate from mood stabilizer alone on primary and secondary endpoints. Possible contributions to this result include enrollment of a substantial number of subjects with low diagnostic confidence, low quality ratings on the MADRS, and overzealous reporting of symptoms by subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT00483548. © Copyright 2011 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
RCT Entities: Population
Interventions
Outcomes
OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy and safety of adjunctive ziprasidone in subjects with bipolar depression treated with lithium , lamotrigine , or valproate . METHOD: 298 adult outpatients with bipolar I disorder (DSM-IV criteria) were randomized to receive ziprasidone , 20-80 mg twice a day, or placebo twice a day for 6 weeks plus their preexisting mood stabilizer. The primary efficacy variable was change in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores from baseline to 6 weeks. The key secondary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to week 6 in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scores. Computer-administered assessments for diagnostic confidence were included for quality control and to evaluate study performance. The study was conducted between October 2007 and December 2008. RESULTS: The mean ± SD daily dose of ziprasidone was 89.8 ± 29.1 mg. Least squares mean ± standard error changes from baseline to week 6 on MADRS total score for ziprasidone and placebo treatment groups were -13.2 ± 1.2 and -12.9 ± 1.1, respectively, with a 2-sided P value of .792. There was no significant difference on the key secondary variable (CGI-S). Adjunctive ziprasidone was well tolerated. Poor quality ratings at baseline were associated with a trend for better improvement on placebo than ziprasidone . Among 43 placebo-treated subjects with poor baseline quality ratings, 29 (67.4%) had baseline MADRS scores > 10 points higher on the computer-administered assessment than the MADRS administered by the site-based rater. The response favoring placebo over ziprasidone observed in this subgroup suggests that poor signal detection in some clinical trials can be a consequence of "subject inflation" as well as "rater inflation." CONCLUSIONS: Adjunctive ziprasidone treatment failed to separate from mood stabilizer alone on primary and secondary endpoints. Possible contributions to this result include enrollment of a substantial number of subjects with low diagnostic confidence, low quality ratings on the MADRS, and overzealous reporting of symptoms by subjects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinical trials.gov Identifier: NCT00483548. © Copyright 2011 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.
Entities: Chemical
Disease
Species
Mesh: See more »
Substances: See more »
Year: 2011
PMID: 21672493 DOI: 10.4088/JCP.09m05934
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Clin Psychiatry ISSN: 0160-6689 Impact factor: 4.384