The Effects of Vortioxetine on Cognitive Function in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder: A Meta-Analysis of Three Randomized Controlled Trials.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Management of cognitive deficits in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) remains an important unmet need. This meta-analysis evaluated the effects of vortioxetine on cognition in patients with MDD. METHODS:Random effects meta-analysis was applied to three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week trials of vortioxetine (5-20mg/day) in MDD, and separately to two duloxetine-referenced trials. The primary outcome measure was change in Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) score. Standardized effect sizes (SES) versus placebo (Cohen's d ) were used as input. Path analysis was employed to determine the extent to which changes in DSST were mediated independently of a change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score. Meta-analysis was applied to MADRS-adjusted and -unadjusted SES values. Changes on additional cognitive tests were evaluated (source studies only). RESULTS:Before adjustment for MADRS, vortioxetine separated from placebo on DSST score (SES 0.25-0.48; nominal p < 0.05) in all individual trials, and statistically improved DSST performance versus placebo in meta-analyses of the three trials (SES = 0.35; p < 0.0001) and two duloxetine-referenced trials (SES = 0.26; p = 0.001). After adjustment for MADRS, vortioxetine maintained DSST improvement in one individual trial ( p = 0.001) and separation from placebo was maintained in meta-analyses of all three trials (SES = 0.24; p < 0.0001) and both duloxetine-referenced trials (SES 0.19; p = 0.01). Change in DSST with duloxetine failed to separate from placebo in individual trials and both meta-analyses. Change in DSST statistically favored vortioxetine versus duloxetine after MADRS adjustment (SES = 0.16; p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS:Vortioxetine, but not duloxetine, significantly improved cognition, independent of depressive symptoms. Vortioxetine represents an important treatment for MDD-related cognitive dysfunction.
Project description:This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, active-referenced (duloxetine 60 mg), parallel-group study evaluated the short-term efficacy and safety of vortioxetine (10-20 mg) on cognitive function in adults (aged 18-65 years) diagnosed with major depressive disorder (MDD) who self-reported cognitive dysfunction. Efficacy was evaluated using ANCOVA for the change from baseline to week 8 in the digit symbol substitution test (DSST)-number of correct symbols as the prespecified primary end point. The patient-reported perceived deficits questionnaire (PDQ) and physician-assessed clinical global impression (CGI) were analyzed in a prespecified hierarchical testing sequence as key secondary end points. Additional predefined end points included the objective performance-based University of San Diego performance-based skills assessment (UPSA) (ANCOVA) to measure functionality, MADRS (MMRM) to assess efficacy in depression, and a prespecified multiple regression analysis (path analysis) to calculate direct vs indirect effects of vortioxetine on cognitive function. Safety and tolerability were assessed at all visits. Vortioxetine was statistically superior to placebo on the DSST (P < 0.05), PDQ (P < 0.01), CGI-I (P < 0.001), MADRS (P < 0.05), and UPSA (P < 0.001). Path analysis indicated that vortioxetine's cognitive benefit was primarily a direct treatment effect rather than due to alleviation of depressive symptoms. Duloxetine was not significantly different from placebo on the DSST or UPSA, but was superior to placebo on the PDQ, CGI-I, and MADRS. Common adverse events (incidence ? 5%) for vortioxetine were nausea, headache, and diarrhea. In this study of MDD adults who self-reported cognitive dysfunction, vortioxetine significantly improved cognitive function, depression, and functionality and was generally well tolerated.
Project description:<h4>Rationale</h4>Vortioxetine has reduced depressive symptoms in adults with major depressive disorder (MDD) in multiple clinical trials.<h4>Objectives</h4>The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of vortioxetine 15 and 20 mg vs placebo in adults with MDD.<h4>Methods</h4>Patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to vortioxetine 15 mg, vortioxetine 20 mg, duloxetine 60 mg (active reference), or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score at week 8 (MMRM). Safety/tolerability assessments included physical examinations, vital signs, laboratory evaluations, electrocardiograms, adverse events (AEs), Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale, and Discontinuation-Emergent Signs and Symptoms checklist.<h4>Results</h4>Six hundred and fourteen patients were randomized. Mean changes in MADRS scores were -12.83 (±0.834), -14.30 (±0.890), -15.57 (±0.880), and -16.90 (±0.884) for placebo, vortioxetine 15 mg (P = .224), vortioxetine 20 mg (P = .023), and duloxetine 60 mg (P < .001) (P vs placebo), respectively. AEs reported by ≥5 % of vortioxetine patients included nausea, headache, diarrhea, dizziness, dry mouth, constipation, vomiting, insomnia, fatigue, and upper respiratory infection. Treatment-emergent sexual dysfunction, suicidal ideation or behavior, and discontinuation symptoms were not significantly different between vortioxetine and placebo.<h4>Conclusions</h4>Vortioxetine 20 mg significantly reduced MADRS total scores after 8 weeks of treatment. Both vortioxetine doses were well tolerated.<h4>Clinical trial registration</h4>ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01153009; www.clinicaltrials.gov/ .
Project description:AIM:The burden of major depressive disorder (MDD) in Japan is high. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the multimodal antidepressant vortioxetine in Japanese patients with MDD. METHODS:Japanese patients aged 20-75?years with recurrent MDD and a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score???26 were randomized to vortioxetine 10 or 20?mg or placebo in a phase-3, double-blind, 8-week study. The primary end-point was change in MADRS total score from baseline. Secondary end-points included MADRS response and remission rates, change in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression-17 item (HAM-D17) score, and other measures of depressive symptoms, including Clinical Global Impression of Severity (CGI-S), Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I), and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS). Cognitive function was assessed using Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) score and Perceived Deficits Questionnaire-5 item (PDQ-5) score. RESULTS:Vortioxetine 10?mg (n = 165) and 20?mg (n = 163) reduced MADRS total score by 2.66 and 3.07 points versus placebo (n = 161) after 8?weeks (P?<?0.01 for each dose), respectively. MADRS response and remission rates were also significantly greater with vortioxetine than with placebo (P?<?0.05 for both doses). Vortioxetine 10 and 20?mg significantly improved HAM-D17 score, CGI-I score, and SDS total score after 8?weeks. PDQ-5 score was significantly improved in subjects administered vortioxetine, while DSST scores showed no significant difference. Vortioxetine was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSION:Vortioxetine at both the 10- and 20-mg/day doses demonstrated robust antidepressant efficacy in Japanese patients with MDD, and was well tolerated over the 8-week treatment period.
Project description:The efficacy of vortioxetine 10 and 20 mg/d vs. placebo on cognitive function and depression in adults with recurrent moderate-to-severe major depressive disorder (MDD) was evaluated. Patients (18-65 yr, N = 602) were randomized (1:1:1) to vortioxetine 10 or 20 mg/d or placebo for 8 wk in a double-blind multi-national study. Cognitive function was assessed with objective neuropsychological tests of executive function, processing speed, attention and learning and memory, and a subjective cognitive measure. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to week 8 in a composite z-score comprising the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) and Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) scores. Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). In the pre-defined primary efficacy analysis, both doses of vortioxetine were significantly better than placebo, with mean treatment differences vs. placebo of 0.36 (vortioxetine 10 mg, p < 0.0001) and 0.33 (vortioxetine 20 mg, p < 0.0001) on the composite cognition score. Significant improvement vs. placebo was observed for vortioxetine on most of the secondary objectives and subjective patient-reported cognitive measures. The differences to placebo in the MADRS total score at week 8 were -4.7 (10 mg: p < 0.0001) and -6.7 (20 mg: p < 0.0001). Path and subgroup analyses indicate that the beneficial effect of vortioxetine on cognition is largely a direct treatment effect. No safety concern emerged with vortioxetine. Vortioxetine significantly improved objective and subjective measures of cognitive function in adults with recurrent MDD and these effects were largely independent of its effect on improving depressive symptoms.
Project description:This study assessed the efficacy, tolerability and safety of vortioxetine versus placebo in adults with recurrent major depressive disorder. This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study included 608 patients [Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ? 26 and Clinical Global Impression - Severity score ? 4]. Patients were randomly assigned (1 : 1 : 1 : 1) to vortioxetine 15 mg/day, vortioxetine 20 mg/day, duloxetine 60 mg/day or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 8 (mixed model for repeated measurements). Key secondary endpoints were: MADRS responders; Clinical Global Impression - Improvement scale score; MADRS total score in patients with baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale ? 20; remission (MADRS ? 10); and Sheehan Disability Scale total score at week 8. On the primary efficacy endpoint, both vortioxetine doses were statistically significantly superior to placebo, with a mean difference to placebo (n = 158) of -5.5 (vortioxetine 15 mg, P < 0.0001, n = 149) and -7.1 MADRS points (vortioxetine 20 mg, P < 0.0001, n = 151). Duloxetine (n = 146) separated from placebo, thus validating the study. In all key secondary analyses, both vortioxetine doses were statistically significantly superior to placebo. Vortioxetine treatment was well tolerated; common adverse events (incidence ? 5%) were nausea, headache, diarrhea, dry mouth and dizziness. No clinically relevant changes were seen in clinical safety laboratory values, weight, ECG or vital signs parameters. Vortioxetine was efficacious and well tolerated in the treatment of patients with major depressive disorder.
Project description: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.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.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).Studies examining the role of vortioxetine in the treatment of MDD are limited.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.
Project description:Background:There is a growing interest in vortioxetine in major depressive disorder (MDD). Objectives:This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of 10 mg/day (mg/d) vortioxetine compared to placebo for MDD in adult. Methods:Eight randomly controlled trials (RCTs) about the treatment of 10 mg/d vortioxetine in adult patients with MDD were identified and 2354 patients were included in meta-analysis. Results:According to the results, 10 mg/d vortioxetine showed significant differences in response rates (OR=1.88, 95% CI=1.40-2.53, P<0.0001), remission rates (OR=1.54, 95% CI=1.27-1.86, P<0.00001), change from baseline in Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score (SMD=-3.50, 95%CI=-4.83 to -2.17, P<0.00001), clinical global Impression-Global Improvement (CGI-I) total score (SMD=-3.40, 95% CI=-4.69 to -2.11, P<0.00001), and change from baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) total score (SMD=-2.09, 95% CI=-2.64 to -1.55, P<0.00001). But 10 mg/d vortioxetine was easier induced nausea (OR=4.18, 95% CI=3.21-5.44, P<0.00001) and constipation (OR=1.88, 95% CI=1.14 to 3.09, P=0.01). Conclusion:10 mg/d vortioxetine was more effective, but easily induced nausea and constipation when compared to placebo for MDD in adult.
Project description:<h4>Aim</h4> Antidepressants, including selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors, often elicit a poor response in patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with significant anxiety symptoms. This study investigated the effects of the multimodal antidepressant vortioxetine in patients with MDD and associated anxiety. <h4>Methods</h4> This was a post hoc analysis of data from an 8-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study of vortioxetine (10 mg or 20 mg) in Japanese patients aged 20–75 years with recurrent MDD and a Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score of at least 26. Changes from baseline to week 8 in MADRS total score and Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D) anxiety/somatization factor score were assessed in patients with anxious depression (HAM-D anxiety/somatization factor score ≥7) and without anxious depression. <h4>Results</h4> Data were available for 489 patients. In patients with anxious depression, the least-squares (LS) mean difference (95% confidence interval [CI]) versus placebo in change in MADRS total score was −3.44 (−6.10, −0.77) for vortioxetine 10 mg and −4.51 (−7.15, −1.87) for vortioxetine 20 mg. In patients with non-anxious depression, the LS mean difference (95% CI) versus placebo was −1.81 (−4.71, 1.09) and −1.05 (−4.00, 1.90) for vortioxetine 10 mg and 20 mg, respectively. Changes from baseline in HAM-D anxiety/somatization factor score were greater in patients treated with vortioxetine 10 mg or 20 mg than in those treated with placebo. <h4>Conclusion</h4> Vortioxetine may be effective for patients with anxiety symptoms in MDD. Further research is warranted to investigate these effects in a real-world clinical setting. <h4>Clinical Trials Registration</h4> ClinicalTrials.gov identifier for primary study: NCT02389816.
Project description:<h4>Purpose</h4>Anhedonia is a core symptom of major depressive disorder (MDD), which has important functional consequences for the patient. This post hoc analysis investigated the relationship between anhedonia and functioning in patients with MDD treated with vortioxetine.<h4>Patients and methods</h4>We conducted a pooled analysis of all 11 short-term, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of vortioxetine (fixed dose, 5-20 mg/day) in patients with MDD which included Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) assessments. A short-term, randomized, active-controlled trial of flexible-dose treatment with vortioxetine (10-20?mg/day) versus agomelatine (25-50 mg/day) was also analyzed. Mean changes from baseline to study endpoint in MADRS total, MADRS anhedonia subscale, SDS total, and SDS social-functioning scores were analyzed by a mixed model for repeated measures. The relationship between treatment effects on anhedonia and functioning was investigated using path analysis.<h4>Results</h4>A total of 4988 patients with MDD were included in the placebo-controlled studies and 495 in the active-comparator study. Significant dose-dependent improvements in overall depressive symptoms, anhedonia, and measures of functioning were seen in vortioxetine-treated patients compared with those who received placebo or agomelatine. Results of the path analysis for the placebo-controlled studies suggested that the effect on functioning was mostly driven by the effect of treatment on MADRS anhedonia factors.<h4>Conclusion</h4>Vortioxetine showed significant short-term efficacy against anhedonia in this large population of patients with MDD. In the placebo-controlled studies, improvements in functioning associated with vortioxetine appeared to be mostly driven by the effect of treatment on MADRS anhedonia factors.
Project description:OBJECTIVE:We determined if early improvement in painful physical symptoms (PPS) can be a predictor of remission in the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS:We included randomized, double-blind, parallel-group clinical trials of duloxetine (40-60 mg/day) versus placebo for the acute treatment of MDD with associated PPS. Only those studies using the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Brief Pain Inventory - Short Form (BPI-SF) were included. Three studies met all criteria and included male or female outpatients aged ?18 years who met the diagnostic criteria for MDD, had a MADRS total score ?20, and had at least moderate pain (BPI-SF average pain score ?3). Positive predictive values (PPVs) and negative predictive values (NPVs) of early improvement in PPS for remission were analyzed. PPVs were the proportion of patients with remission (MADRS total score ?10) at week 8 out of patients who experienced early improvement in BPI-SF average pain score (?30% decrease from baseline at week 1, 2, or 4). NPVs were the proportion of patients without remission (MADRS total score >10) at week 8 out of patients who did not experience early improvement in PPS. RESULTS:Data from 1,320 patients were analyzed (duloxetine N=641 and placebo N=679). The overall remission (MADRS total score ?10 at week 8) rate for the duloxetine group was significantly higher than the placebo group (38.5% vs 21.8%; P<0.0001). For both treatment groups, PPVs of early improvement in BPI-SF (30% improvement from baseline) were higher than the overall remission rate for all weeks examined (weeks 1, 2, and 4); in general, NPVs of early improvement in BPI-SF for nonremission were higher than the overall nonremission rate. CONCLUSION:Early improvement in PPS can be a useful clinical indicator of subsequent treatment outcome for MDD patients with associated PPS.