OBJECTIVES: A substantial portion of the morbidity associated with rapid-cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD) stems from refractory depression. This study assessed the antidepressant effects of lamotrigine as compared with placebo when used as add-on therapy for rapid-cycling bipolar depression non-responsive to the combination of lithium plus divalproex. METHODS: During Phase 1 of this trial, hypomanic, manic, mixed, and/or depressed outpatients (n = 133) aged 18-65 years with DSM-IV RCBD type I or II were initially treated with the open combination of lithium and divalproex for up to 16 weeks. During Phase 2, subjects who did not meet the criteria for stabilization (n = 49) (i.e., remained in or cycled into the depressed phase) were randomly assigned to double-blind, adjunctive lamotrigine (n = 23) or adjunctive placebo (n = 26). The primary endpoint was the mean change in depression symptom severity from the beginning of Phase 2 to the end of Phase 2 (week 12) on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Data were analyzed by analysis of covariance with last observation carried forward and a mixed-models analysis. RESULTS: During Phase 1, a high rate of study discontinuations occurred due to intolerable side effects (13/133; 10%) and study non-adherence (22/133; 17%). Only 14% (19/133) stabilized on the open combination of lithium and divalproex. Among the 49 (37%) patients randomized to the double-blind adjunctive treatment phase, mean ± standard error change from baseline on the MADRS total score was -8.5 ± 1.7 points for lamotrigine and -9.1 ± 1.5 points for placebo (p = not significant; mixed-models analysis). No significant differences were observed in the rates of response, remission, or bimodal response between lamotrigine and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The poor tolerability, lack of efficacy, and high rate of early discontinuation with the combination of lithium and divalproex suggests this regimen was ineffective for the majority of patients with RCBD. Among patients who did not stabilize on lithium and divalproex, the addition of lamotrigine was no more effective than placebo in reducing depression severity. The findings suggest an opportunity for several design modifications to enhance signal detection in future trials of RCBD. The main limitation is the small number of subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVES: A substantial portion of the morbidity associated with rapid-cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD) stems from refractory depression. This study assessed the antidepressant effects of lamotrigine as compared with placebo when used as add-on therapy for rapid-cycling bipolar depression non-responsive to the combination of lithium plus divalproex. METHODS: During Phase 1 of this trial, hypomanic, manic, mixed, and/or depressed outpatients (n = 133) aged 18-65 years with DSM-IV RCBD type I or II were initially treated with the open combination of lithium and divalproex for up to 16 weeks. During Phase 2, subjects who did not meet the criteria for stabilization (n = 49) (i.e., remained in or cycled into the depressed phase) were randomly assigned to double-blind, adjunctive lamotrigine (n = 23) or adjunctive placebo (n = 26). The primary endpoint was the mean change in depression symptom severity from the beginning of Phase 2 to the end of Phase 2 (week 12) on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Data were analyzed by analysis of covariance with last observation carried forward and a mixed-models analysis. RESULTS: During Phase 1, a high rate of study discontinuations occurred due to intolerable side effects (13/133; 10%) and study non-adherence (22/133; 17%). Only 14% (19/133) stabilized on the open combination of lithium and divalproex. Among the 49 (37%) patients randomized to the double-blind adjunctive treatment phase, mean ± standard error change from baseline on the MADRS total score was -8.5 ± 1.7 points for lamotrigine and -9.1 ± 1.5 points for placebo (p = not significant; mixed-models analysis). No significant differences were observed in the rates of response, remission, or bimodal response between lamotrigine and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: The poor tolerability, lack of efficacy, and high rate of early discontinuation with the combination of lithium and divalproex suggests this regimen was ineffective for the majority of patients with RCBD. Among patients who did not stabilize on lithium and divalproex, the addition of lamotrigine was no more effective than placebo in reducing depression severity. The findings suggest an opportunity for several design modifications to enhance signal detection in future trials of RCBD. The main limitation is the small number of subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.
Authors: J R Calabrese; M D Shelton; C L Bowden; D J Rapport; T Suppes; E R Shirley; S E Kimmel; S J Caban Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2001 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Zuowei Wang; Keming Gao; David E Kemp; Philip K Chan; Mary Beth Serrano; Carla Conroy; Yiru Fang; Stephen J Ganocy; Robert L Findling; Joseph R Calabrese Journal: Psychopharmacol Bull Date: 2010
Authors: Ralph W Kupka; David A Luckenbaugh; Robert M Post; Gabriele S Leverich; Willem A Nolen Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2003-12 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: William Coryell; David Solomon; Carolyn Turvey; Martin Keller; Andrew C Leon; Jean Endicott; Pamela Schettler; Lewis Judd; Timothy Mueller Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2003-09
Authors: Charles L Bowden; Joseph R Calabrese; Gary Sachs; Lakshmi N Yatham; Shaheen Akthar Asghar; Magne Hompland; Paul Montgomery; Nancy Earl; Tonya M Smoot; Joseph DeVeaugh-Geiss Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2003-04
Authors: Mauricio Tohen; Eduard Vieta; Joseph Calabrese; Terence A Ketter; Gary Sachs; Charles Bowden; Philip B Mitchell; Franca Centorrino; Richard Risser; Robert W Baker; Angela R Evans; Karin Beymer; Sanjay Dube; Gary D Tollefson; Alan Breier Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2003-11
Authors: Joseph R Calabrese; Charles L Bowden; Gary Sachs; Lakshmi N Yatham; Kirsten Behnke; Olli-Pekka Mehtonen; Paul Montgomery; John Ascher; Walter Paska; Nancy Earl; Joseph DeVeaugh-Geiss Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2003-09 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Robert M Post; Lori L Altshuler; Gabriele S Leverich; Willem A Nolen; Ralph Kupka; Heinz Grunze; Mark A Frye; Trisha Suppes; Susan L McElroy; Paul E Keck; Mike Rowe Journal: Prim Care Companion CNS Disord Date: 2014-12-18
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
Authors: Vicki C Fung; Lindsay N Overhage; Louisa G Sylvia; Noreen A Reilly-Harrington; Masoud Kamali; Keming Gao; Richard C Shelton; Terence A Ketter; William V Bobo; Michael E Thase; Joseph R Calabrese; Mauricio Tohen; Thilo Deckersbach; Andrew A Nierenberg Journal: J Affect Disord Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 4.839
Authors: Lakshmi N Yatham; Sidney H Kennedy; Sagar V Parikh; Ayal Schaffer; David J Bond; Benicio N Frey; Verinder Sharma; Benjamin I Goldstein; Soham Rej; Serge Beaulieu; Martin Alda; Glenda MacQueen; Roumen V Milev; Arun Ravindran; Claire O'Donovan; Diane McIntosh; Raymond W Lam; Gustavo Vazquez; Flavio Kapczinski; Roger S McIntyre; Jan Kozicky; Shigenobu Kanba; Beny Lafer; Trisha Suppes; Joseph R Calabrese; Eduard Vieta; Gin Malhi; Robert M Post; Michael Berk Journal: Bipolar Disord Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 6.744
Authors: Konstantinos N Fountoulakis; Lakshmi N Yatham; Heinz Grunze; Eduard Vieta; Allan H Young; Pierre Blier; Mauricio Tohen; Siegfried Kasper; Hans Jurgen Moeller Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2020-04-23 Impact factor: 5.176