Literature DB >> 22722504

Two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of ziprasidone in outpatients with bipolar I depression: did baseline characteristics impact trial outcome?

Ilise Lombardo1, Gary Sachs, Sheela Kolluri, Charlotte Kremer, Ruoyong Yang.   

Abstract

Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 6-week studies comparing ziprasidone versus placebo for treatment of bipolar depression (BPD) failed to meet their primary study objectives, indicating that either ziprasidone is ineffective in the treatment of BPD or the study failed. Adult outpatients with bipolar I depression with 17-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score more than 20 at screening and baseline received either ziprasidone 40 to 80 mg/d, 120 to 160 mg/d, or placebo (study 1), or ziprasidone 40 to 160 mg/d or placebo (study 2). Primary efficacy measure in both studies was change from baseline in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total scores at week 6 (end of the study). Mixed-model repeated-measures methodology was used to analyze the primary efficacy measure in both studies. Secondary efficacy measures in both studies included Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression total score and Clinical Global Impression-Improvement score. Post hoc analyses were conducted for both studies to examine potential reasons for study failure. In both, ziprasidone treatment groups failed to separate statistically from placebo for change from baseline Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score at week 6. Response rates were 49%, 53%, and 46% for placebo, ziprasidone 40 to 80 mg/d, and ziprasidone 120 to 160 mg/d, respectively (study 1), and 51% and 53% for placebo and ziprasidone 40 to 160 mg/d, respectively (study 2). Ziprasidone 40 to 160 mg/d did not show superiority over placebo at week 6 in the treatment of BPD. Post hoc analyses revealed serious inconsistencies in subject rating that may have limited the ability to detect a difference between drug and placebo response. Rating reliability warrants further investigation to improve clinical trial methodology in psychiatry.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22722504     DOI: 10.1097/JCP.0b013e31825ccde5

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Psychopharmacol        ISSN: 0271-0749            Impact factor:   3.153


  14 in total

Review 1.  The International College of Neuro-Psychopharmacology (CINP) Treatment Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder in Adults (CINP-BD-2017), Part 2: Review, Grading of the Evidence, and a Precise Algorithm.

Authors:  Konstantinos N Fountoulakis; Lakshmi Yatham; Heinz Grunze; Eduard Vieta; Allan Young; Pierre Blier; Siegfried Kasper; Hans Jurgen Moeller
Journal:  Int J Neuropsychopharmacol       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.176

Review 2.  Pharmacological management of bipolar depression: acute treatment, maintenance, and prophylaxis.

Authors:  Eduard Vieta; Marc Valentí
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 3.  Important clinical features of atypical antipsychotics in acute bipolar depression that inform routine clinical care: a review of pivotal studies with number needed to treat.

Authors:  Keming Gao; Chengmei Yuan; Renrong Wu; Jun Chen; Zuowei Wang; Yiru Fang; Joseph R Calabrese
Journal:  Neurosci Bull       Date:  2015-05-30       Impact factor: 5.203

4.  The Psychiatric Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria in Placebo-Controlled Monotherapy Trials of Bipolar Depression: An Analysis of Studies of the Past 20 Years.

Authors:  Mark Zimmerman; Carolina Guzman Holst; Heather L Clark; Matthew Multach; Emily Walsh; Lia K Rosenstein; Douglas Gazarian
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2016-12       Impact factor: 5.749

Review 5.  A systematic review of the evidence for the treatment of acute depression in bipolar I disorder.

Authors:  Michael A Cerullo; Stephen M Strakowski
Journal:  CNS Spectr       Date:  2013-03-18       Impact factor: 3.790

6.  Comparative Efficacy and Tolerability of Adjunctive Pharmacotherapies for Acute Bipolar Depression: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anees Bahji; Dylan Ermacora; Callum Stephenson; Emily R Hawken; Gustavo Vazquez
Journal:  Can J Psychiatry       Date:  2020-11-11       Impact factor: 4.356

Review 7.  Personalized Pharmacotherapy for Bipolar Disorder: How to Tailor Findings From Randomized Trials to Individual Patient-Level Outcomes.

Authors:  Joseph F Goldberg
Journal:  Focus (Am Psychiatr Publ)       Date:  2019-07-16

8.  Efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics for acute bipolar depression: a network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Aditi Kadakia; Carole Dembek; Vincent Heller; Rajpal Singh; Jennifer Uyei; Katsuhiko Hagi; Tadashi Nosaka; Antony Loebel
Journal:  BMC Psychiatry       Date:  2021-05-11       Impact factor: 3.630

9.  Evidence review and clinical guidance for the use of ziprasidone in Canada.

Authors:  David M Gardner; Andrea L Murphy; Stan Kutcher; Serge Beaulieu; Carlo Carandang; Alain Labelle; Pierre Lalonde; Ashok Malla; Heather Milliken; Claire O'Donovan; Ayal Schaffer; Jorge Soni; Valerie H Taylor; Richard Williams
Journal:  Ann Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2013-01-24       Impact factor: 3.455

10.  Randomized, placebo-controlled, adjunctive study of armodafinil for bipolar I depression: implications of novel drug design and heterogeneity of concurrent bipolar maintenance treatments.

Authors:  Mark A Frye; Jess Amchin; Michael Bauer; Caleb Adler; Ronghua Yang; Terence A Ketter
Journal:  Int J Bipolar Disord       Date:  2015-09-02
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.