Search

Objective: To evaluate the acute efficacy, safety, and tolerability of flexibly dosed ziprasidone in children and adolescents with Bipolar I Disorder (BD-I). Methods: Participants, 10-17 years of age, meeting The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th edition criteria, were randomized 1:1 in a 4-week double-blind (DB) study, to receive ziprasidone (20-80 mg/twice a day) or placebo. Some were then enrolled in a 26-week open-label extension (OLE) study. The primary efficacy measure was the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score. Results: A total of 171 participants entered this randomized DB study and 23 continued into the OLE study. The mean (SD) age of the combined sample was 13.4 (2.1) years, 44.4% were male, and 66.7% were white. The demographic characteristics of participants who received ziprasidone (n = 86) or placebo (n = 85) were similar. The primary objective was met: the mean difference for ziprasidone versus placebo in the YMRS total score was -4.23 (95% confidence interval: -7.14 to -1.32; p = 0.005) indicating an effect size of 0.58. The most common adverse events (AEs) in the ziprasidone group were somnolence (31.4%), fatigue (22.1%), and nausea (14%). The mean Fridericia-corrected QT interval (QTcF) intervals in the ziprasidone group were moderately prolonged relative to the placebo group at all study visits. No participants had QTcF intervals ≥480 msec or an increase from baseline ≥60 msec. No AEs indicative of QT prolongation occurred. Weight, body mass index (BMI), and BMI z-scores, and metabolic measures were similar in both treatment groups. The data from the OLE study will be reported separately. Conclusions: Ziprasidone was effective in children and adolescents with BD-I in a manic episode, replicating the results of a previous study with a similar design (Findling et al. 2013). Overall, ziprasidone was safe and well tolerated with no meaningful effects on weight or metabolic parameters. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov. NCT02075047 and NCT03768726. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and long-term safety of vilazodone in children and adolescent outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: Children and adolescents aged 7-17 years of age with MDD were randomized 2:2:1 to 8 weeks of double-blind placebo, vilazodone 15 or 30 mg/day or fluoxetine 20 mg/day, respectively. The primary and secondary efficacy outcomes, respectively, were change from baseline to week 8 in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score total score and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measurement approach. Patients who completed the 8-week randomized controlled trial (RCT), as well as new (de novo) patients, could participate in a 26-week, vilazodone-only, open-label extension (OLE) study. Results: The RCT enrolled 473 patients (60% female) with an average age of 13 years. Change in CDRS-R and CGI-S scores from baseline to week 8 did not differ between patients who received vilazodone and those randomized to placebo. The least-squares mean change from baseline in CDRS-R scores was similar for vilazodone and placebo (-20.7 vs. -20.3, p = 0.77; least-squares mean difference [LSMD] = -0.40). For fluoxetine, the LSMD versus placebo was -2.3 (p = 0.14). The OLE enrolled 330 patients (60% female) with an average age of 13-14 years. Overall, no new safety concerns were identified compared to what is known in adults. Conclusions: Similar improvements in depressive symptoms were observed in all arms. This study does not support the efficacy of vilazodone 15 or 30 mg/day for pediatric patients with MDD. No new or unexpected safety concerns were detected during the RCT or OLE studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Describe the safety and tolerability of lisdexamfetamine dimesylate (LDX) and provide data on clinical effects for efficacy-related endpoints and pharmacokinetics in preschool-aged children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: This phase 2, multicenter, open-label, dose-optimization study (ClinicalTrials.gov registry: NCT02402166) was conducted at seven U.S. sites between April 15, 2015, and June 30, 2016. Children (4-5 years of age) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria for ADHD and having ADHD Rating Scale-IV Preschool version (ADHD-RS-IV-PS) total scores ≥28 (boys) or ≥24 (girls) were eligible. Open-label LDX (8-week duration) was initiated at 5 mg and titrated to 30 mg until achieving an optimal dose. Assessments included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), vital sign changes, ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score changes, and pharmacokinetic evaluations. Results: Among 24 participants, the most frequently reported TEAE was decreased appetite (8/24; 33%). At week 8/early termination, mean (standard deviation) systolic and diastolic blood pressure and pulse changes from baseline were -1.1 (7.31) and 1.5 (6.93) mmHg and -0.8 (12.75) bpm, respectively. The mean (95% confidence interval) change from baseline ADHD-RS-IV-PS total score at the final on-treatment assessment was -26.1 (-32.2 to -20.0). Pharmacokinetic parameters of d-amphetamine, a major active metabolite of LDX, were characterized: d-amphetamine exposure increased with LDX dose; mean tmax and t1/2, respectively, ranged from 4.00 to 4.23 hours and 7.18 to 8.46 hours. Conclusions: In preschool-aged children with ADHD, LDX was generally well tolerated and reduced ADHD symptoms, consistent with observations in children 6-17 years of age. Based on these findings, a starting LDX dose as low as 5 mg in phase 3 studies in preschool-aged children is supported. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Dasotraline is a potent inhibitor of presynaptic dopamine and norepinephrine reuptake with a pharmacokinetic profile characterized by slow absorption and a long elimination half-life. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dasotraline in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).Methods: Children aged 6-12 years with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) diagnosis of ADHD were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind once-daily treatment with dasotraline (2 or 4 mg) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in the ADHD Rating Scale Version IV-Home Version (ADHD RS-IV HV) total score at week 6.Results: A total of 342 patients were randomized to dasotraline or placebo (mean age 9.1 years, 66.7% male). Treatment with dasotraline was associated with significant improvement at study endpoint in the ADHD RS-IV HV total score for the 4 mg/day dose versus placebo (-17.5 vs. -11.4; p < 0.001; effect size [ES], 0.48), but not for the 2 mg/day dose (-11.8 vs. -11.4; ns; ES, 0.03). A regression analysis confirmed a significant linear dose-response relationship for dasotraline. Significant improvement for dasotraline 4 mg/day dose versus placebo was also observed across the majority of secondary efficacy endpoints, including the Clinical Global Impression (CGI)-Severity score, the Conners Parent Rating Scale-Revised scale (CPRS-R) ADHD index score, and subscale measures of hyperactivity and inattentiveness. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) were higher in the dasotraline 4 mg/day group (12.2%) compared with the 2 mg/day group (6.3%) and placebo (1.7%). The most frequent AEs associated with dasotraline were insomnia, decreased appetite, decreased weight, and irritability. Psychosis-related symptoms were reported as AEs by 7/219 patients treated with dasotraline in this study. There were no serious AEs or clinically meaningful changes in blood pressure or heart rate on dasotraline.Conclusion: In this placebo-controlled study, treatment with dasotraline 4 mg/day significantly improved ADHD symptoms and behaviors, including attention and hyperactivity, in children aged 6-12 years. The most frequently reported AEs observed on dasotraline included insomnia, decreased appetite, decreased weight, and irritability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: In this 6-month open-label extension (OLE) of NCT01491035 (a 14-day, open-label, pharmacokinetic/safety lead-in study), the long-term safety and tolerability of vortioxetine (5-20 mg/day) were investigated in children and adolescents with a DSM-IV-TR™ diagnosis of depressive or anxiety disorder in the United States or Germany. The study also was designed to provide data to inform dose selection and titration in future pediatric studies with vortioxetine.Methods: Safety evaluations included spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS), and the Pediatric Adverse Events Rating Scale (PAERS; clinician administered). Clinical effectiveness was determined by Clinical Global Impressions. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder was permitted, including concomitant use of stimulant medication (US sites only).Results: Of the 47 patients who completed the lead-in period, 41 continued into the OLE. Most patients (n = 39 [95%]) continued their previous dose regimen. Twenty-one patients (51%) withdrew during the OLE; the most common primary reasons were administrative [n = 8], AEs [n = 4], and lack of efficacy [n = 3]. Thirty-five patients (85%) had ≥1 AE, 86% of which were mild or moderate in severity. Five patients (12%) reported a severe AE, none of which was considered related to study medication. The most common AEs (≥10%) were headache (27%), nausea (20%), dysmenorrhea (females; 19%), and vomiting (15%), with no relationship between AE intensity and age or dose. Five patients reported instances of suicidal ideation during the OLE, one of whom also reported this during the lead-in period. Two patients had nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; one had a nonfatal suicide attempt. Throughout the study, there was a decrease over time in the incidence and intensity of AEs collected using the PAERS. Effectiveness assessment indicated a trend toward improvement based on numeric results.Conclusion: This OLE confirms the findings from the lead-in study, which concluded that a dosing strategy of 5-20 mg/day is safe, well tolerated, and suitable for future clinical studies of vortioxetine in pediatric patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine if acute treatment with aripiprazole (APZ) would be superior to treatment with placebo in reducing dysfunctional symptoms of elevated mood and/or irritability in symptomatic children and adolescents at familial high risk for bipolar disorder (BPD) whose mood episodes occur spontaneously. These are patients we have previously referred to as suffering from "cyclotaxia."Methods: This was single-site, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outpatient clinical trial in which youths aged 5-17 years who met diagnostic criteria for either cyclothymic disorder (CYC) or BPD not otherwise specified (BP-NOS) were randomly assigned to receive either APZ or placebo. Eligible participants had at least one parent with BPD, another first- or second-degree relative afflicted with a mood disorder, and also had not responded to psychotherapy. Treatment with APZ was initiated at a dose of approximately 0.1 mg/kg/day and could be increased by approximately 0.05 mg/kg/day at each study visit. Patients were seen weekly for 4 weeks and then every other week thereafter for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was mean change from baseline on Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score.Results: A total of 59 patients (30 APZ, 29 placebo) aged 11.8 (SD = 2.7) years were randomized and returned for at least one postbaseline assessment. The mean total daily doses of active APZ and placebo were 7.1 mg (SD = 3.7) and 7.4 mg (SD = 4.2), respectively. At the 12-week time point, APZ was superior to placebo on the primary outcome measure (p < 0.005). Most adverse events were mild and transient in nature. There was a significant difference in weight gain from baseline between patients who received APZ (2.3 kg [SD = 3.3]) and those who received placebo (0.7 kg [SD = 1.8]).Conclusion: This double-blind trial found that APZ was significantly more efficacious than placebo in reducing symptoms of mania in children and adolescents with cyclotaxia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The primary objectives of this study were to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) and tolerability of single and multiple doses of vortioxetine in children and adolescents with a depressive or anxiety disorder and to provide supportive information for appropriate dosing regimens for pediatric clinical trials.Methods: This prospective, open-label, multinational, multisite, multiple-dose trial enrolled 48 patients (children and adolescents; 1:1 ratio) divided into 8 cohorts (4 adolescent and 4 child), with each cohort including 6 patients. The cohorts in each age group were assigned to receive one of four dosing regimens: vortioxetine 5, 10, 15, or 20 mg q.d. for 14 days. The total treatment period lasted 14-20 days with patients in the higher dose cohorts uptitrated over 2-6 days. Plasma samples for PK analysis were obtained on the first and last days of dosing.Results: Among children and adolescents, respectively, 62% and 92% had depression and 58% and 33% had anxiety disorder. Comorbid attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was present in 50% of children and 38% of adolescents. After 14 days q.d. at the target dose, the PK of vortioxetine concentrations was generally proportional to the dose in both age groups. Exposure, as assessed by maximum plasma concentrations and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to 24 hours, was 30%-40% lower in adolescents than in children. There was no significant relationship between sex, height, or ADHD diagnosis and PK parameters. Most adverse events were mild in severity and consistent with those seen in adults.Conclusion: The results suggest that the dosages of vortioxetine evaluated (5-20 mg q.d.; approved for treatment in adults) and the uptitration schedule used are appropriate for pediatric efficacy and safety trials. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Abnormal glutamatergic neurotransmission is implicated in the pathophysiology of autism spectrum disorder (ASD). In this study, the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of the glutamatergic N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor antagonist memantine (once-daily extended-release [ER]) were investigated in children with autism in a randomized, placebo-controlled, 12 week trial and a 48 week open-label extension.Methods: A total of 121 children 6-12 years of age with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR)-defined autistic disorder were randomized (1:1) to placebo or memantine ER for 12 weeks; 104 children entered the subsequent extension trial. Maximum memantine doses were determined by body weight and ranged from 3 to 15 mg/day.Results: There was one serious adverse event (SAE) (affective disorder, with memantine) in the 12 week study and one SAE (lobar pneumonia) in the 48 week extension; both were deemed unrelated to treatment. Other AEs were considered mild or moderate and most were deemed not related to treatment. No clinically significant changes occurred in clinical laboratory values, vital signs, or electrocardiogram (ECG). There was no significant between-group difference on the primary efficacy outcome of caregiver/parent ratings on the Social Responsiveness Scale (SRS), although an improvement over baseline at Week 12 was observed in both groups. A trend for improvement at the end of the 48 week extension was observed. No improvements in the active group were observed on any of the secondary end-points, with one communication measure showing significant worsening with memantine compared with placebo (p = 0.02) after 12 weeks.Conclusions: This trial did not demonstrate clinical efficacy of memantine ER in autism; however, the tolerability and safety data were reassuring. Our results could inform future trial design in this population and may facilitate the investigation of memantine ER for other clinical applications. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Previous "Treatment of Severe Childhood Aggression" (TOSCA) reports demonstrated that many children with severe physical aggression and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) responded well to two randomized treatments (parent training [PT]+stimulant+placebo = Basic vs. PT+stimulant+risperidone = Augmented) for 9 weeks. An important clinical question is whether these favorable outcomes are maintained over longer times.Methods: Clinical responders to the 9-week trial (n = 103/168), defined as Clinical Global Impressions (CGI)-Improvement of much/very much improved plus substantial reduction in parent ratings of disruptiveness, were followed another 12 weeks (21 weeks total) while remaining on blinded treatment. Outcome measures included Clinical Global Impressions scale, Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form (NCBRF), other parent/teacher-rated scales, laboratory tests, clinician ratings of abnormal movement, and other adverse events (AEs).Results: Parent ratings of problem behavior showed minimal worsening of behavior from end of the 9-week acute trial (expected from regression to the mean after selecting best responders), but outcomes at Extension endpoint were meaningfully improved compared with acute study baseline. As expected, outcomes for Basic and Augmented treatment did not differ among these children selected for good clinical response. During Extension, more Augmented subjects had elevated prolactin; there were no clinically confirmed cases of tardive dyskinesia. Delayed sleep onset was the most frequent Basic AE. We also conducted a last-observation-carried-forward analysis, which included both nonresponders and responders. We found that, at the end of Extension, Augmented subjects had more improvement than Basic subjects on the NCBRF Positive Social subscale (p = 0.005; d = 0.44), the Antisocial Behavior Scale Reactive Aggression subscale (p = 0.03; d = 0.36), and marginally so on the Disruptive Behavior Total subscale (p = 0.058; d = 0.29, the primary outcome).Conclusions: The medium-term outcomes were good for the participants in both treatment groups, perhaps because they were selected for good response. When nonresponders were included in ITT analyses, there was some indication that Augmented surpassed Basic treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To investigate the safety and pharmacokinetic profile of ascending doses of desvenlafaxine in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder. Assessment of the effect of desvenlafaxine on depression symptoms was exploratory.Methods: The 8-week, open-label study included an initial 3.5-day inpatient period followed by a 7.5-week outpatient period. Children (7-11 years) received a single desvenlafaxine dose of 10, 25, 50, or 100 mg on day 1; adolescents (12-17 years) received desvenlafaxine 25, 50, 100, or 200 mg/day. Plasma and urine samples were collected over the initial 72-hour inpatient period. Evaluations included treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), physical examinations (including Tanner Staging), vital signs, laboratory assessments, 12-lead electrocardiogram, Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, and the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R).Results: In all, 29 children and 30 adolescents took at least one dose of desvenlafaxine and were included in the safety population (children: 10 mg, n = 6; 25 mg, n = 7; 50 mg, n = 9; 100 mg, n = 7; adolescents: 25 mg, n = 7; 50 mg, n = 7; 100 mg, n = 8; 200 mg, n = 8). Total area under the drug concentration-time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC) appeared to increase linearly with increasing dose. Mean (standard deviation [SD]) AUC ranged from 628 (346) ng/mL (desvenlafaxine 10 mg) to 6732 (3031) ng/mL (100 mg) in children and from 1123 (361) ng/mL (25 mg) to 11,730 (3113) ng/mL (200 mg) in adolescents. During the combined inpatient and outpatient period, 16/29 (55%) children and 21/30 (70%) adolescents reported at least one TEAE. One serious adverse event (suicidal behavior) was reported. Mean (SD) change from baseline in CDRS-R total scores at week 8 was -19.00 (9.87) for children and -21.57 (11.50) for adolescents.Conclusions: Desvenlafaxine AUC values increased linearly with dose; body weight alone provided an adequate prediction for dose-normalized AUC. Desvenlafaxine was generally safe and well tolerated in children and adolescents for treatment up to 8 weeks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of asenapine in adolescents with schizophrenia.Methods: In an 8 week, randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial, subjects (12-17 years of age) meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) criteria for schizophrenia were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, asenapine 2.5 mg b.i.d., or asenapine 5 mg b.i.d. Subjects who completed the 8 week acute study could participate in a 26 week flexible-dose asenapine-only open-label extension (OLE).Results: A similar percentage of subjects completed treatment on day 56 (2.5 mg b.i.d. (n=98): 83%; 5 mg b.i.d. [n=106]: 79%; placebo [n=102]: 79%). In the mixed model for repeated measures analysis of the primary end-point (with Hochberg correction for multiplicity), least squares (LS) mean differences between asenapine and placebo on the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at day 56 were not significant (-4.8 for 2.5 mg b.i.d., p=0.070; -5.6 for 5 mg b.i.d., p=0.064). Significant improvement in the Clinical Global Impressions-Severity score was observed in the 5 mg b.i.d. group versus placebo on day 56 (LS mean -0.3, p=0.024). In the acute phase, ≥7% weight gain and the composite event of somnolence, sedation, and hypersomnia were more common in both asenapine groups than in the placebo group. Akathisia, fasting glucose elevation, and extrapyramidal syndrome were more common in the 5 mg b.i.d. group than in the placebo group. There were no unexpected adverse events in the OLE, and PANSS total scores decreased by -16.1 points in the group previously treated with placebo (n=62) and by -11.2 points in the continuous asenapine group (n=131) from OLE baseline to week 26.Conclusions: Although improvements in PANSS total score at day 56 of the acute phase were numerically greater for both asenapine 2.5 and 5 mg b.i.d. than for placebo and were maintained in the OLE, the primary end-point did not achieve statistical significance in the acute phase. No new or unexpected safety concerns were detected during the acute phase or after an additional 26 weeks of asenapine treatment in the adolescent population with schizophrenia.Clinical Trials Registry: NCT01190254 and NCT1190267 at ClinicalTrials.gov. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Quetiapine is an atypical antipsychotic with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of adolescent schizophrenia and pediatric bipolar mania. Large, placebo-controlled studies of interventions in pediatric bipolar depression are lacking. The current study investigated the efficacy and safety of quetiapine extended-release (XR) in patients 10-17 years of age, with acute bipolar depression. Methods: This multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study investigated quetiapine XR (dose range, 150-300 mg/day) in pediatric outpatients with an American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of bipolar I or bipolar II disorder (current or most recent episode depressed) treated for up to 8 weeks (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00811473). The primary study outcome was mean change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score. Secondary efficacy outcomes included CDRS-R-based response and remission rates. Results: Of 193 patients randomized to treatment, 144 patients completed the study (75.3% of quetiapine XR group [ n=70]; 74.0% of placebo group [ n=74]). Least squares mean changes in CDRS-R total score at week 8 were: −29.6 (SE, 1.65) with quetiapine XR and −27.3 (SE, 1.60) with placebo, a between-treatment group difference of −2.29 (SE, 1.99; 95% CI, −6.22, 1.65; p=0.25; mixed-model for repeated measures analysis). Rates of response and remission did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The safety profile of quetiapine XR was broadly consistent with the profile reported previously in adult studies of quetiapine XR and pediatric studies of quetiapine immediate-release (IR). Potentially clinically significant elevations in clinical chemistry values included triglycerides (9.3%, quetiapine XR; 1.4%, placebo group) and thyroid stimulating hormone (4.7%, quetiapine XR; 0%, placebo group). An adverse event potentially related to diabetes mellitus occurred in 3.3% of the quetiapine XR versus no adverse events in the placebo group. Conclusions: Quetiapine XR did not demonstrate efficacy relative to placebo in this 8 week study of pediatric bipolar depression. Quetiapine XR was generally safe and well tolerated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess the effect of guanfacine extended release (GXR) adjunctive to a psychostimulant on oppositional symptoms in children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Methods: A multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled dose-optimization study of GXR (1-4 mg/d) or placebo administered morning ( a.m.) or evening ( p.m.) adjunctive to psychostimulant was conducted in subjects ages 6-17 with suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone. Suboptimal response was defined as treatment with a stable dose of psychostimulant for ≥4 weeks with ADHD Rating Scale IV total score ≥24 and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness score ≥3, as well as investigator opinion. Primary efficacy and safety results have been reported previously. Secondary efficacy measures included the oppositional subscale of the Conners' Parent Rating Scale-Revised: Long Form (CPRS-R:L); these are reported herein. Results: Significant reductions from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment on the oppositional subscale of the CPRS-R:L were seen with GXR plus psychostimulant compared with placebo plus psychostimulant, both in the overall study population (placebo-adjusted least squares [LS] mean change from baseline to the final on-treatment assessment: GXR a.m.+psychostimulant, −2.4, p=0.001; GXR p.m.+psychostimulant, −2.2, p=0.003) as well as in the subgroup of subjects with significant baseline oppositional symptoms (GXR a.m.+psychostimulant, −3.6, p=0.001; GXR p.m.+psychostimulant, −2.7, p=0.013). Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 77.3%, 76.3%, and 63.4% of subjects in the GXR a.m., GXR p.m., and placebo groups, respectively, in the overall study population. Conclusions: GXR adjunctive to a psychostimulant significantly reduced oppositional symptoms compared with placebo plus a psychostimulant in subjects with ADHD and a suboptimal response to psychostimulant alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to assess long-term safety and tolerability of desvenlafaxine (administered as desvenlafaxine succinate) in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: An 8 week, multicenter, open-label, fixed-dose study of children (ages 7-11 years) and adolescents (ages 12-17 years) with MDD was followed by a 6 month, flexible-dose extension study. Patients were administered desvenlafaxine 10-100 mg/day (children) or 25-200 mg/day (adolescents) for a total of 8 months. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs), withdrawals because of AEs, laboratory tests, vital signs, and the Columbia Suicide-Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) were collected. Eight month safety results from the lead-in plus extension studies are reported for extension study participants, using lead-in study day −1 as baseline. Results: Forty patients were enrolled in both studies (20 children; 20 adolescents). Of those, four children and three adolescents withdrew because of AEs. Treatment-emergent AEs reported by three or more patients were upper abdominal pain (15%) and headache (15%) in children, and somnolence (30%), nausea (20%), upper abdominal pain (15%), and headache (15%) in adolescents. Negativism (oppositional behavior) in a child was the single serious AE reported. No deaths occurred during the lead-in or extension studies. Mean pulse rates demonstrated statistically significant increases from lead-in study baseline to final evaluation (children, +5.2 bpm; adolescents, +5.9 bpm; p≤0.05). No statistically significant change in blood pressure was observed at final evaluation. Two adolescents (0 children) reported suicidal ideation on the C-SSRS at screening assessment and during the lead-in and/or extension trials; one adolescent reported suicidal ideation after screening only. Conclusions: Long-term (8 month) treatment with desvenlafaxine was generally safe and well tolerated in depressed children and adolescents. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy and safety of ziprasidone in children and adolescents with bipolar I disorder. Methods: Subjects 10-17 years of age with a manic or mixed episode associated with bipolar I disorder participated in a 4 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial (RCT) followed by a 26 week open-label extension study (OLE). Subjects were randomized 2:1 to initially receive flexible-dose ziprasidone (40-160 mg/day, based on weight) or placebo. Primary outcome was the change in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores from baseline. Safety assessments included weight and body mass index (BMI), adverse events (AEs), vital signs, laboratory measures, electrocardiograms, and movement disorder ratings. Results: In the RCT, 237 subjects were treated with ziprasidone ( n=149; mean age, 13.6 years) or placebo ( n=88; mean age, 13.7 years). The estimated least squares mean changes in YMRS total (intent-to-treat population) were −13.83 (ziprasidone) and −8.61 (placebo; p=0.0005) at RCT endpoint. The most common AEs in the ziprasidone group were sedation (32.9%), somnolence (24.8%), headache (22.1%), fatigue (15.4%), and nausea (14.1%). In the OLE, 162 subjects were enrolled, and the median duration of treatment was 98 days. The mean change in YMRS score from the end of the RCT to the end of the OLE (last observation carried forward) was −3.3 (95% confidence interval, −5.0 to −1.6). The most common AEs were sedation (26.5%), somnolence (23.5%), headache (22.2%), and insomnia (13.6%). For both the RCT and the OLE, no clinically significant mean changes in movement disorder scales, BMI z-scores, liver enzymes, or fasting lipids and glucose were observed. One subject on ziprasidone in the RCT and none during the OLE had Fridericia-corrected QT interval (QTcF) ≥460 ms. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that ziprasidone is efficacious for treating children and adolescents with bipolar disorder. Ziprasidone was generally well tolerated with a neutral metabolic profile. Clinical Trials Registry: NCT00257166 and NCT00265330 at . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the short- and long-term efficacy, safety, and tolerability of ziprasidone in adolescents with schizophrenia. Methods: Subjects ages 13-17 years with schizophrenia (American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. [DSM-IV]) were enrolled in a 6 week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter trial (RCT) followed by a 26 week open-label extension study (OLE). Subjects were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to flexible-dose oral ziprasidone (40-160 mg/day, based on weight) or placebo. Primary end-point was change from baseline in Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Anchored (BPRS-A) total score. Safety assessments included adverse events, vital signs, laboratory measures, electrocardiograms, weight and body mass index, and movement disorder ratings. Results: Planned interim analysis for the primary end-point in the RCT resulted in early termination of both studies because of futility. In the RCT, 283 subjects received ziprasidone ( n=193) or placebo ( n=90). In the intent-to-treat analysis population, the least squares mean (SE) BPRS-A score decrease from baseline at week 6 was not significantly different ( p=0.15; −14.16 [0.78] for ziprasidone and −12.35 [1.05] for placebo). Per-protocol analysis was significant ( p=0.02). In the OLE, 221 subjects entered the OLE and received ziprasidone for a median of 99 days. The mean (SD) change in BPRS-A score from end of RCT to end of OLE (last observation carried forward) was −6.9 (8.9). The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥10%) for all causalities during the RCT were somnolence and extrapyramidal disorders, and during OLE was somnolence only. No subjects had Fridericia's corrected QT (QTcF) ≥500 ms in the RCT or OLE phases. One completed suicide occurred during the OLE phase. For RCT and OLE, no clinically significant changes were reported in metabolic indices and laboratory measures. Conclusions: Ziprasidone failed to separate from placebo in treatment of schizophrenia in adolescents. Ziprasidone was generally well tolerated with an overall neutral weight and metabolic profile. Clinical Trials Registry: NCT00257192 and NCT00265382 at . [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the extended efficacy, safety, and tolerability of escitalopram relative to placebo in adolescents with major depressive disorder (MDD). Methods: Adolescents (12-17 years) who completed an 8-week randomized, double-blind, flexible-dose, placebo-controlled, lead-in study of escitalopram 10-20 mg versus placebo could enroll in a 16-24-week, multisite extension trial; patients maintained the same lead-in randomization (escitalopram or placebo) and dosage (escitalopram 10 or 20 mg/day, or placebo) during the extension. The primary efficacy was Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) change from the lead-in study baseline to treatment week 24 (8-week lead-in study plus 16-week extension); the secondary efficacy was Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) score at week 24. All efficacy analyses used the last observation carried forward (LOCF) approach; sensitivity analyses used observed cases (OC) and mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM). Safety was evaluated via adverse event (AE) reports and the clinician-rated Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS). Results: Following lead-in, 165 patients enrolled in the double-blind extension (82 placebo; 83 escitalopram); 40 (48.8%) placebo and 37 (44.6%) escitalopram patients completed treatment. CDRS-R total score improvement was significantly greater for escitalopram than for placebo ( p=0.005, LOCF; p=0.014; MMRM). Response rates (CDRS-R ≥40% reduction from baseline [adjusted and unadjusted] and CGI-I ≤2) were significantly higher for escitalopram than for placebo (LOCF); remission rates (CDRS-R ≤28) were 50.6% for escitalopram and 35.7% for placebo ( p=0.002). OC analyses were not significantly different between groups. The most frequent escitalopram AEs (≥5% and more frequent than placebo) were headache, nausea, insomnia, vomiting, influenza-like symptoms, diarrhea, and urinary tract infection. Most AEs were mild/moderate and not related to the study drug. AEs suggestive of self-harm occurred in 5.7% and 7.1% of placebo and escitalopram patients. Occurrence of suicidal behavior and/or suicidal ideation assessed by C-SSRS was 10.9% (14/128) for placebo and 14.5% (19/131) for escitalopram. Conclusions: Extended use of escitalopram was generally safe and resulted in modest improvement in efficacy in adolescents with MDD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The purpose of this study was to describe the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy continued for up to 26-weeks in youth with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. Methods: Medically healthy boys and girls with a baseline Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of schizophrenia (ages 13-17 years) or a manic episode of bipolar I disorder (ages 10-17 years) who participated in one of two acute, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of immediate-release quetiapine were potentially eligible to enroll in a 26-week, open-label study. During the open-label study, quetiapine was flexibly dosed at 400-800 mg/day, with options to reduce dosing to 200 mg/day based on tolerability. Safety and tolerability outcomes assessed from open-label baseline to week 26 included adverse events (AEs), metabolic/laboratory parameters, extrapyramidal symptoms, suicidality, and vital signs. Results: Of 381 patients enrolled in the open-label study ( n=176, schizophrenia; n=205, bipolar disorder diagnosis), 237 patients (62.2%) completed the 26-week study period (71.0%, schizophrenia; 54.6%, bipolar disorder). The most common AEs reported during the study included somnolence, headache, sedation, weight increase, and vomiting. A total of 14.9% of patients experienced a shift to potentially clinically significant low levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and 10.2% of patients experienced a shift to potentially clinically significant high triglyceride levels. Weight gain ≥7% was reported in 35.6% of patients between open-label baseline and final visit. After adjustment for normal growth, 18.3% of study participants experienced clinically significant weight gain (i.e., increase in body mass index ≥0.5 standard deviations from baseline). Conclusions: In this 26-week study, quetiapine flexibly dosed at 400-800 mg/day, with options to reduce dosing based on tolerability, was generally safe and well tolerated in youth. Clinicians should monitor lipid profiles and weight gain in youth with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder during treatment with quetiapine. Clinical trial registration information: Quetiapine Fumarate (Seroquel) in the Treatment of Adolescent Patients With Schizophrenia and Bipolar I Disorder (ANCHOR 150). Available at: [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: This study examined the long-term effectiveness of lithium for the treatment of pediatric bipolar disorder within the context of combination mood stabilizer therapy for refractory mania and pharmacological treatment of comorbid psychiatric conditions.Methods: Outpatients, ages 7-17 years, meeting American Psychiatric Association, diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria for bipolar disorder I (BP-I) (manic or mixed) who demonstrated at least a partial response to 8 weeks of open-label treatment with lithium (phase I) were eligible to receive open-label lithium for an additional 16 weeks (phase II). Up to two adjunctive medications could be prescribed to patients experiencing residual symptoms of mania or comorbid psychiatric conditions, following a standardized algorithm.Results: Forty-one patients received continued open-label long-term treatment with lithium for a mean of 14.9 (3.0) weeks during phase II. The mean weight-adjusted total daily dose at end of phase II was 27.8 (6.7) mg/kg/day, with an average lithium concentration of 1.0 (0.3) mEq/L. Twenty-five of the 41 patients (60.9%) were prescribed adjunctive psychotropic medications for residual symptoms. The most frequent indications for adjunctive medications were refractory mania (n=13; 31.7%) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n=15; 36.6%). At the end of this phase 28 (68.3%) patients met a priori criteria for response (≥50% reduction from phase I baseline in young mania rating scale [YMRS] summary score and a clinical global impressions-improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 or 2), with 22 (53.7%) considered to be in remission (YMRS summary score≤12 and CGI-severity score of 1 or 2). These data suggest that patients who initially responded to lithium maintained mood stabilization during continuation treatment, but partial responders did not experience further improvement during Phase II, despite the opportunity to receive adjunctive medications. The most commonly reported (≥20%) adverse events associated with lithium treatment were vomiting, headache, abdominal pain, and tremor.Conclusions: Lithium may be a safe and effective longer-term treatment for patients with pediatric bipolar disorder who respond to acute treatment with lithium. Partial responders to acute lithium did not appear to experience substantial symptom improvement during the continuation phase, despite the possibility that adjunctive medications could be prescribed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]