Hamilton Rating Scale For Anxiety Total Score Research Articles

Effect of adverse childhood experiences on hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis function and antidepressant efficacy in untreated first episode patients with major depressive disorder

Adverse childhood experiences (ACEs) has been associated not only with an increased vulnerability for stress-related psychiatric disorders but also with distinct alterations of the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal (HPA) axis function and the immune system. The aim of this study is to examine differences in the HPA axis between major depressive disorder (MDD) patients with and without ACEs, and to explore differences in efficacy and HPA changes after long term antidepressant treatment between these two groups. A cohort of 803 patients with MDD were recruited. After the determination of cortisol (COR) and adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH), Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD), Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA), the Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ), 403 subjects were recruited for the following treatment study. Finally 330 MDD patients finished the monotherapy treatments of four antidepressants (Fluoxetine, Sertraline, Venlafaxine-extended release (XR), Duloxetine hydrochloride) for 12 weeks. Of 403 patients, 226 (56%) patients reported ACEs. Total score of HAMD in MDD with ACEs were higher than those in MDD without ACEs. There were significant differences for both ACTH and COR between MDD patients with and without ACEs that MDD patients with any types of maltreatment had higher level. Both COR and ACTH was positively and significantly correlated with the total scores of CTQ, HAMD, HAMA. After 12 weeks treatment of antidepressants monotherapy, the mean (SD) changes in HAMD and HAMA total scores was greater in MDD without ACEs than those in MDD with ACEs. At the 12-week end point, response was achieved by 37.2% in the MDD with ACEs group, 59.0% in the MDD without ACEs group respectively, with significant difference. Remission was achieved by 15.2% in the MDD with ACEs group and 32.2% in the MDD without ACEs group, with significant difference. The change in ACTH level in MDD without ACEs was also greater than that in MDD with ACEs, which was positively and significantly correlated with the HAMD total score only in MDD patient without ACEs. Logistic regression analysis showed that the total scores of CTQ, level of COR and ACTH at baseline were significantly associated with the response and remission. These findings indicated that exposure to ACEs for MDD could influence the HPA function and severity of symptoms. ACEs, ACTH and COR could be used as predictors of long term antidepressant treatment, suggested that are poor prognostic signs for antidepressants monotherapy in MDD with ACEs.

Epistemological and methodological significance of quantitative studies of psychomotor activity for the explanation of clinical depression

Psychomotor disturbances have been regarded as cardinal symptoms of depression for centuries and their objective assessment may have predictive value with respect to the severity of clinical depression, treatment outcome and prognosis of the affective disorder. Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A). Psychomotor indicators of activity and reactivity were objectively recorded and measured by means of computerized ultrasonographic craniocorpography. We found a statistically significant correlation between disturbances in psychomotor indicators and MADRS total score (r = 0.4; P < 0.0001). The severity of HAM-A total score had no statistically significant correlation with psychomotor indicators (P > 0.05). We found that different items of MADRS and HAM-A correlated with psychomotor disturbances of different strength and significance. Objectively, measured psychomotor retardation was associated with greater severity of depressive symptoms assessed at the clinical level. Integration between different methods is needed in order to improve understanding of the psychopathology and the neurobiology of a disputable diagnosis such as clinical depression.

EXTENDED RELEASE QUETIAPINE FUMARATE IN MAJOR DEPRESSIVE DISORDER: ANALYSIS IN PATIENTS WITH ANXIOUS DEPRESSION

A pooled analysis was performed on data from two studies evaluating the efficacy of once-daily extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) monotherapy for patients with major depressive disorder. Through these analyses (based on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) measures), we aim to further evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine XR in depressed patients with high levels of anxiety symptoms. Secondary analyses were conducted of pooled individual patient data from two 8-week (6-week randomized phase, 2-week drug discontinuation phase), double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of quetiapine XR (50-300 mg/day). Outcomes included change from randomization at Week 6 in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score for patients with anxious and nonanxious depression. Of 968 patients included in the analysis, 788 (81.4%) were classified as anxious depressed (defined as HAM-D anxiety/somatization factor score ≥ 7) and 180 (18.6%) were nonanxious. For patients with anxious depression and nonanxious depression, statistically significant differences versus placebo in MADRS total score were recorded for quetiapine XR 150 mg/day (-3.24, P < .001 and -4.82, P < .01, respectively) and 300 mg/day (-3.57, P < .001 and -3.39, P < .05, respectively) at Week 6. In the second analysis using an alternate definition of anxious depression (baseline HAM-A total score ≥ 20), quetiapine XR 150 and 300 mg/day resulted in significant differences versus placebo in MADRS total score reduction in patients with high and lower levels of anxiety. The adverse event (AE) profile was similar irrespective of baseline anxiety levels, although patients with anxious depression reported a somewhat greater incidence of AEs. Quetiapine XR monotherapy improved symptoms of depression in patients with higher and lower levels of anxiety.

Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR): a once-daily monotherapy effective in generalized anxiety disorder. Data from a randomized, double-blind, placebo- and active-controlled study

The efficacy and tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) once-daily monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) was assessed. This multicentre, double-blind, randomized, placebo- and active-controlled, phase III trial consisted of a 1- to 4-wk enrolment/wash-out period and a 10-wk (8-wk active treatment, 2-wk post-treatment drug-discontinuation) study period; 873 patients were randomized to 50 mg or 150 mg quetiapine XR, 20 mg paroxetine, or placebo. Primary endpoint was change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) total score. At week 8, all active agents produced significant improvements in HAMA total and psychic subscale scores vs. placebo; HAMA somatic subscale scores were significantly reduced only by 150 mg quetiapine XR. Significant separation from placebo (-2.90) in HAMA total score was observed at day 4 for 50 mg quetiapine XR (-4.43, p<0.001) and 150 mg quetiapine XR (-3.86, p<0.05), but not for paroxetine (-2.69). Remission (HAMA total score 7) rates at week 8 were significantly higher for 150 mg quetiapine XR (42.6%, p<0.01) and paroxetine (38.8%, p<0.05) vs. placebo (27.2%). The most common adverse events (AEs) were dry mouth, somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, and headache, for quetiapine XR, and nausea, headache, dizziness for paroxetine. A lower proportion of patients reported sexual dysfunction with quetiapine XR [0.9% (50 mg), 1.8% (150 mg)] than with placebo (2.3%) or paroxetine (7.4%). The incidence of AEs potentially related to extrapyramidal symptoms was: quetiapine XR: 50 mg, 6.8%, 150 mg, 5.0%; placebo, 1.8%; and paroxetine, 8.4%. Once-daily quetiapine XR is an effective and generally well-tolerated treatment for patients with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early as day 4.

The efficacy of pregabalin and benzodiazepines in generalized anxiety disorder presenting with high levels of insomnia

The objective of this study was to assess the impact of high levels of insomnia on response to pregabalin (PGB) in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Pooled data were analyzed from six double-blind, placebo-controlled, 4- to 6-week trials of outpatients who met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (fourth edition) criteria for GAD with a minimum Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) score = 18. Response was evaluated for three fixed-dose PGB groups (150, 300-450, 600 mg/day), and for a benzodiazepine group (alprazolam or lorazepam). A 'high-insomnia' subgroup was defined by a baseline HAM for Depression (HAM-D) insomnia factor score greater than 3 (maximum = 6). At baseline, 1002 (54%) patients met the criteria for the high-insomnia subgroup, and 852 (46%) for the low-insomnia subgroup. Mean baseline HAM-A scores were 1-2 points higher in high-insomnia versus low-insomnia patients. In high-insomnia patients, PGB produced significantly greater improvement in HAM-A total scores at last observation carried forward endpoint on 300-450 mg (-13.1+/-0.6) and 600 mg (-11.2+/-0.5) dose groups compared with placebo (-8.3+/-0.5; P<0.0001 for both comparisons); the improvement on PGB 150 mg was not significant (-9.9+/-0.7; P = 0.051). Improvement was significant in the benzodiazepine group (-11.0+/-0.6; P<0.0001). In the high-insomnia subgroup, treatment with PGB significantly (P<0.001) improved the HAM-D insomnia factor scores on both the 300-450 mg (-2.73) and 600 mg (-2.35) doses, and on benzodiazepines (-2.52) compared with placebo (-1.51); improvement on PGB 150 mg (-1.69) was not significant. Rates of treatment-emergent insomnia were lower on PGB compared with placebo in both the high- and low-insomnia subgroups. In conclusion, PGB was well tolerated, and improved overall anxiety symptoms, while specifically improving insomnia in patients with GAD presenting with high levels of concurrent insomnia.

Efficacy and safety of pregabalin in elderly people with generalised anxiety disorder

Pregabalin is a novel compound that has been shown to have efficacy in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder and is licensed for the treatment of the disorder in the European Union. The current study was designed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of pregabalin, an alpha(2)delta-ligand, in the treatment of generalised anxiety disorder in people 65 years and older. This was a double-blind, randomised (2:1), placebo-controlled, 8-week trial of pregabalin, in flexible doses of 150-600 mg/day, in the treatment of DSM-IV generalised anxiety disorder with a baseline Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HRSA) total score >/=20. The primary outcome was end-point (week 8 or last visit, with last observation carried forward (LOCF)) change in HRSA total score. A total of 273 patients (women, 78%; mean age, 72 years (s.d.=6); mean baseline HRSA total score, 26 (s.d.=4.6)) were randomised and received study treatment. On the primary intent-to-treat LOCF analysis, pregabalin was associated with a 2-point greater reduction in HRSA total score than placebo (12.87 v. 10.7; P<0.05). In a post hoc repeated measures mixed-effect model analysis, pregabalin was associated with significantly greater improvement than placebo in the HRSA total score from week 2 (-9.8 (s.d.=0.6) v. -7.2 (s.d.=0.8); P=0.0052) through week 8 (-14.4 (s.d.=0.6) v. -11.6 (s.d.=0.8); P=0.0070). Significant improvement was observed in the pregabalin group on both the HRSA psychic and somatic anxiety factors. There was a significantly greater decrease from baseline in mean Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD) score with pregabalin compared with placebo (-5.48 (s.d.=0.46) v. -4.02 (s.d.=0.59); P=0.041). Pregabalin was well-tolerated, with almost all adverse events in the mild-to-moderate range, and self-limiting (median duration of 4-16 days). Discontinuations due to adverse events were similar for pregabalin (10.7%) and placebo (9.4%). Pregabalin, in doses of 150-600 mg/day, was a safe and effective treatment of generalised anxiety disorder in patients 65 years and older. The anxiolytic efficacy of pregabalin had an early onset (by 2 weeks) and significantly improved both psychic and somatic symptoms of anxiety.

Implications of Pain in Generalized Anxiety Disorder

To conduct a post hoc evaluation of the prevalence of clinically significant pain and the efficacy of duloxetine in patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) and concurrent pain. Data from two 9- to 10-week double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized clinical trials of duloxetine (60 to 120 mg) in DSM-IV-defined GAD were analyzed (study 1 was conducted from July 2004 to September 2005; study 2 was conducted from August 2004 to June 2005). Efficacy was assessed with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A), visual analog scales (VAS) for pain, the Hospital Anxiety Depression Scale (HADS), the Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement of Illness (CGI-I) scale, the Patient Global Impressions-Improvement (PGI-I) scale, and the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) global functional impairment scale. Of 840 patients randomly assigned to treatment, 61.3% (302 duloxetine, 213 placebo) had VAS scores ≥ 30 mm on at least 1 of the pain scales, indicating clinically significant pain. Among those patients with concurrent pain at baseline, change from baseline to endpoint in the HAM-A total score (42.9% change in mean scores for duloxetine, 31.4% for placebo), HADS anxiety scale (40.3% vs. 22.8%), HADS depression scale (36.1% vs. 20.5%), HAM-A psychic factor (45.9% vs. 29.9%), and SDS global functional improvement score (45.5% vs. 22.1%) was significantly (all p's < .001) greater for duloxetine compared with placebo. Improvement on the CGI-I (p = .003) and PGI-I (p < .001) was also significantly greater for duloxetine. Response (HAM-A total score decrease ≥ 50%) (49% vs. 29%) and remission (HAM-A total score ≤ 7 at endpoint) (29% vs. 18%) rates were significantly greater for duloxetine compared with placebo (p < .001 and p = .041, respectively). Duloxetine demonstrated statistically significantly greater reduction in pain on all 6 VAS pain scales (all p's < .001 except headaches with p < .002) (for duloxetine, percent change in means from baseline to endpoint ranged from 40.1% to 45.2% across the 6 VAS scales; for placebo, 22.0% to 26.3%). Duloxetine, relative to placebo, improves anxiety symptoms, pain, and functional impairment among patients with GAD with concurrent clinically significant pain. clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: NCT00122824 (study 1) and NCT00475969 (study 2).

Efficacy of Duloxetine for the Treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorder

This study examined the efficacy and tolerability of duloxetine, a dual reuptake inhibitor of serotonin and norepinephrine, for the treatment of patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Patients were ≥ 18 years old and recruited from 5 European countries, the United States, and South Africa. The study had a 9-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, fixed-dose, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. A total of 513 patients (mean age = 43.8 years; 67.8% female) with a DSM-IV-defined GAD diagnosis received treatment with duloxetine 60 mg/day (N = 168), duloxetine 120 mg/day (N = 170), or placebo (N = 175). The primary efficacy measure was the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total score. Secondary measures included the Sheehan Disability Scale, HAM-A psychic and somatic anxiety factor scores, and HAM-A response, remission, and sustained improvement rates. The study was conducted from July 2004 to September 2005. Both groups of duloxetine-treated patients demonstrated significantly greater improvements in anxiety symptom severity compared with placebo-treated patients as measured by HAM-A total score and HAM-A psychic and somatic anxiety factor scores (p values ranged from ≤ .01 to ≤ .001). Duloxetine-treated patients had greater functional improvements in Sheehan Disability Scale global and specific domain scores (p ≤ .001) than placebo-treated patients. Both duloxetine doses also resulted in significantly greater HAM-A response, remission, and sustained improvement rates compared with placebo (p values ranged from ≤ .01 to ≤ .001). The rate of study discontinuation due to adverse events was 11.3% for duloxetine 60 mg and 15.3% for duloxetine 120 mg versus 2.3% for placebo (p ≤ .001). The results of this study demonstrate that duloxetine 60 mg/day and 120 mg/day were efficacious and well tolerated and thus may provide primary care physicians with a useful pharmacologic intervention for GAD. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00122824.

Lymphocyte subsets, cardiovascular measures and anxiety state before and after a professional examination

Controversies exist regarding the impact of psychological stress on the functioning of the immune system in humans. The aim of the present study, therefore, was to evaluate whether the condition of a pre-exam stress may or not modify resting lymphocyte subsets, as well as blood pressure and heart rate. About 22 medical residents of both sexes not suffering from any medical or psychiatric disorder were included in the study. Anxiety levels were measured by means of the Hamilton rating scale for anxiety (HRSA) and anxiety traits by means of the panic-agoraphobic spectrum self-report (PAS-SR) version and the obsessive-compulsive spectrum self-report (OBS-SR) version. The results showed that systolic blood pressure and heart rate increased significantly just before sitting an examination (t1) in all subjects, as compared with a calm situation (t2), in parallel with the increase in the HRSA total score, while no significant difference was observed in lymphocyte subsets at the two assessment times. However, men had a higher number of CD4+ cells than women at t1 and t2, while women showed a higher heart rate at t1. In addition, significant correlations between CD4+ lymphocyte count and heart rate at t1 or HRSA at t2 were detected.These findings indicate that the acute stress determined by sitting for examination provokes changes in autonomic nervous system parameters, such as blood pressure and heart rate, as well as in the subjective feeling of anxiety, as shown by the increased HRSA total scores, which were not paralleled by modifications of lymphocyte subsets. However, individual differences, related to both sex and personality traits yet to be identified, seem to have an impact in shaping the stress response.

Ginkgo biloba special extract EGb 761 ® in generalized anxiety disorder and adjustment disorder with anxious mood: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Ginkgo biloba special extract EGb 761 ®, an anti-dementia drug, enhances cognitive functioning and stabilizes mood in cognitively impaired elderly subjects. Moreover, EGb 761 ® had been found to alleviate symptoms of anxiety in people with mental decline, therefore it was now tested for clinical efficacy in younger patients suffering from anxiety. One hundred and seven patients with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD, n = 82) or adjustment disorder with anxious mood (ADWAM, n = 25) according to the diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders, third edition – revised (DSM-III-R) were randomized to daily doses of 480 mg EGb 761 ®, 240 mg EGb 761 ® or placebo for 4 weeks. Intention-to-treat (ITT) analyses were performed on the primary outcome measure, the Hamilton rating scale for anxiety (HAMA), and the secondary variables, the clinical global impression of change (CGI-C), the Erlangen anxiety tension and aggression scale (EAAS), the list of complaints (B-L′), and the patient’s global rating of change. The HAMA total scores decreased by −14.3 (±8.1), −12.1 (±9.0) and −7.8 (±9.2) in the high-dose EGb 761 ®, the low-dose EGb 761 ® and the placebo group, respectively. Changes were significantly different from placebo for both treatment groups with p = 0.0003 (high-dose group) and p = 0.01 (low-dose). Regression analyses revealed a dose–response trend ( p = 0.003). EGb 761 ® was significantly superior to placebo on all secondary outcome measures. It was safe and well tolerated and may thus be of particular value in elderly patients with anxiety related to cognitive decline.

Sertraline Treatment for Generalized Anxiety Disorder

This study assessed the efficacy and safety of sertraline in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). The study was conducted from April 2000 to May 2002. Outpatients with DSM-IV GAD (N = 326) who satisfied inclusion/exclusion criteria and completed a 1-week screening phase were randomly assigned to 10-week double-blind treatment with flexible dosing of sertraline (50-200 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total score. Response was defined as a 50% or greater decrease in HAM-A total score at endpoint. Sertraline produced a statistically significant reduction in anxiety symptoms, as measured by HAM-A total change scores (p = .032), HAM-A psychic anxiety subscale (p = .011), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-anxiety subscale (p = .001). Response rates were significantly higher (p = .05) for the sertraline group (59.2%) compared to the placebo group (48.2%). Sertraline was well tolerated, with only sexual side effects reported significantly more often by subjects receiving sertraline than those receiving placebo. Despite the relatively small between-group differences, study findings suggest a role for sertraline in the acute treatment of GAD.

Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin in the Treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Pregabalin has demonstrated robust, rapid efficacy in reducing symptoms of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in 4 placebo-controlled clinical trials. The current study compared the efficacy and safety of pregabalin and venlafaxine in patients diagnosed with moderate to severe GAD. The study was conducted from December 21, 1999, to July 31, 2001. Outpatients (N = 421) in primary care or psychiatry settings meeting DSM-IV criteria for GAD were randomly assigned to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with pregabalin 400 or 600 mg/day, venlafaxine 75 mg/day, or placebo. The primary analysis was change in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total score from baseline to last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) endpoint. Secondary analyses included the change in HAM-A psychic (emotional) and somatic (physical) factor scores, significant improvement at week 1, and week 1 improvement sustained at every visit through endpoint. Pregabalin at both dosages (400 mg/day, p = .008; 600 mg/day, p = .03) and venlafaxine (p = .03) produced significantly-greater improvement in HAM-A total score at LOCF endpoint than did placebo. Only the pregabalin 400-mg/day treatment group experienced significant improvement in all a priori primary and secondary efficacy measures. Pregabalin in both dosage treatment groups (400 mg/day, p < .01; 600 mg/day, p < .001) significantly improved HAM-A total score at week 1, with significant improvement through LOCF endpoint. Statistically significant improvement began at week 2 for venlafaxine. Discontinuation rates due to associated adverse events were greatest in the venlafaxine treatment group: venlafaxine, 20.4%; pregabalin 400 mg/day, 6.2%; pregabalin 600 mg/day, 13.6%; placebo, 9.9%. Pregabalin was safe, well tolerated, and rapidly efficacious across the physical-somatic as well as the emotional symptoms of GAD in the majority of patients studied in primary care and psychiatric settings.

Quetiapine in the Treatment of Anxiety in Patients With Bipolar I or II Depression

Quetiapine monotherapy shows efficacy in bipolar depression. The analyses in this multicenter, double-blind, randomized, fixed-dose, placebo-controlled study evaluated effects of quetiapine monotherapy on anxiety symptoms in bipolar depression. Of 542 outpatients randomly assigned to treatment, 539 with bipolar I (N = 358) or bipolar II (N = 181) disorder experiencing a major depressive episode (DSM-IV) received 8 weeks of quetiapine monotherapy (600 or 300 mg/day) or placebo between September 2002 and October 2003. Anxiety assessments included the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) and relevant items from the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D). Analyses evaluated the pooled dose groups versus placebo. At week 8, quetiapine 600 and 300 mg/day each demonstrated significant improvements in HAM-A total score versus placebo (-10.8 and -9.9 vs. -6.7, p < .001). Quetiapine (pooled doses) significantly improved HAM-A total score from week 1. In bipolar I depression, quetiapine showed significant improvement in HAM-A total score versus placebo (-10.4 vs. -5.1, p < .001). In bipolar I depression, quetiapine also showed significant improvements versus placebo on the HAM-A anxious mood and tension items, HAM-A psychic and somatic subscales, MADRS inner tension item, and HAM-D psychic anxiety item (all p < .001), but not the HAM-D somatic anxiety item. In bipolar II depression, quetiapine reduced the HAM-A total score more than placebo, but the difference was not statistically significant (-9.8 vs. -9.0, p = .473). In bipolar II depression, quetiapine showed significant improvement versus placebo on the HAM-A anxious mood, MADRS inner tension, and HAM-D psychic anxiety items (all p < .01). Quetiapine monotherapy shows efficacy in treating anxiety symptoms in bipolar I depression; however, the anxiolytic effects in bipolar II disorder require further investigation.

The Selective GABA Reuptake Inhibitor Tiagabine for the Treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorder

To evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of tiagabine, a selective gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) reuptake inhibitor, in adults with generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). This 8-week, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study enrolled patients with GAD (DSM-IV). Tiagabine was initiated at 4 mg/day and then flexibly dosed twice a day to a maximum dose of 16 mg/day. Study drug was tapered after week 8 in decrements of 2 mg every other day. Efficacy assessments included the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) and Sheehan Disability Scale. Adverse events, sexual functioning, and change in depressive symptoms were monitored. Data were collected from May 2003 to January 2004. A total of 266 patients (tiagabine, N = 134; placebo, N = 132) were included in safety analyses; 260 patients (tiagabine N = 130; placebo N = 130) were included in efficacy analyses. Tiagabine reduced symptoms of GAD according to the observed case and mixed models repeated-measures (MMRM) analyses but not the primary last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) analysis. At final visit, the reduction from baseline in mean HAM-A total score was 11.8 for tiagabine, compared with 10.2 for placebo (LOCF analysis, p = .27). In a post hoc MMRM analysis, a significant difference in the mean reduction in HAM-A total score over the efficacy evaluation period was found, favoring tiagabine over placebo (p < .01). Tiagabine had an early onset of effect, as shown by significant reduction from baseline in mean HAM-A total score compared with placebo at week 1 (observed cases, p < .05). Tiagabine was generally well tolerated and not associated with changes in sexual functioning or depressive status. Symptoms of a discontinuation syndrome during taper were not observed. The primary LOCF analysis was negative; however, results from the observed case and MMRM analyses suggest that tiagabine may be a useful treatment option for adult patients diagnosed with GAD. These findings warrant further evaluation in randomized clinical studies.

Adjunctive Risperidone in Generalized Anxiety Disorder

Although significant advances have been made in recent years in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD), many patients remain symptomatic despite ongoing treatment, underscoring the need for adjunctive new treatments to help improve response. Forty patients with a primary diagnosis of DSM-IV GAD, who continued to experience GAD symptoms despite current anxiolytic treatment of at least 4 weeks' duration, as evidenced by Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total score > or = 18 and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity of Illness scale score of moderate or greater, completed a 1-week screening phase and were then randomly assigned to 5 weeks of double-blind adjunctive treatment with placebo or risperidone at flexible doses of 0.5 to 1.5 mg/day. Patients continued to take their anxiolytics throughout the study. The study was conducted from June 2001 through March 2003. Adjunctive risperidone was associated with statistically significant improvements in core anxiety symptoms, as demonstrated by greater reductions in HAM-A total scores (p = .034) and HAM-A psychic anxiety factor scores (p = .047) compared with placebo. Although change scores on other outcome variables, including response rates, were higher in the risperidone group, differences did not achieve statistical significance. Study findings suggest that risperidone at low doses may represent a useful tool in the management of symptomatic GAD patients.

Mirtazapine treatment of Generalized Anxiety Disorder: a fixed dose, open label study

We investigated the efficacy of mirtazapine in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Forty-four adult outpatients with GAD were treated openly with a fixed dose of mirtazapine (30 mg) for 12 weeks. The primary outcome measure was the change from baseline in total score on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A). The Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I) was rated at the endpoint. Patients with a reduction of 50% or more on the HAM-A total score and a CGI-I score of 1 or 2 at endpoint were considered responders to treatment; remission was defined as a HAM-A score <or=7. At 12 weeks, response was achieved by 79.5% of the patients (n=35) and remission by 36.4% of patients (n=16). This study supports the notion that mirtazapine is an efficacious and well tolerated treatment for GAD. Limitations of the present study must be considered and further placebo-controlled trials are needed.

An Open-label Study of Tiagabine as Augmentation Therapy for Anxiety

At least 50% of patients with anxiety disorders experience only partial response to pharmacotherapy and require augmentation therapy. Gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) is the major inhibitory neurotransmitter in the CNS, and agents that modulate GABA neurotransmission have shown promise in the treatment of anxiety disorders and are often used as augmentation agents. This study evaluated tiagabine, a selective GABA reuptake inhibitor (SGRI), as augmentation therapy. This 8-week, open-label study enrolled patients who remained symptomatic despite adequate drug trials for treatment of anxiety symptoms. Tiagabine augmentation therapy was initiated at 4 mg/d (taken in 2 doses; one in the morning with breakfast and one in the evening with a snack) for 2 days and increased to 8 mg/d for 10 days. Dose was then adjusted according to efficacy/tolerability in increments of 2 mg every 3 days up to a maximum of 20 mg/d. Effect was assessed using the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A), Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI), Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), and 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36). Of the 18 patients enrolled, 17 were included in the efficacy analysis; one withdrew due to an adverse event prior to post-baseline assessment. Mean final dose of tiagabine was 13 mg/d. Tiagabine as augmentation therapy further reduced anxiety symptoms, as shown by significant decreases in mean HAM-A total and BAI scores at Week 8 (P<0.001). Thirteen patients (76%) responded (> or =50% reduction in HAM-A total score), and 10 patients (59%) achieved remission (HAM-A total score < or =7) at Week 8. Tiagabine improved sleep quality, with a significant reduction seen in PSQI global score at Week 8 (P=.001). Augmentation therapy with tiagabine was generally well tolerated. These preliminary findings suggest that the SGRI tiagabine may be an effective and generally well tolerated augmentation therapy in patients with anxiety who remain symptomatic despite adequate drug trials for treatment of anxiety symptoms.

Emotional withdrawal, CT abnormalities and drug response in late life depression

In this study, the authors investigated if CNS degenerative abnormalities could correlate with depressive symptoms in elderly patients, if the presence of mild/moderate cognitive impairment could be related to the response to treatment and the role of peculiar clinical features in influencing the response to treatment. Fifty-three patients (60–75 years) diagnosed as affected by late onset (after 60 years) Major Depressive Episodes according to DSM-IV criteria were studied. Brain vascular and degenerative markers were assessed by computed tomography (CT) through measurements of a lateralized version of the bifrontal index and a rating scale addressing subcortical disease. The presence of mild/moderate cognitive impairment [(24–28 total score at the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE)], and of specific symptoms were assessed at baseline and evaluated with respect to the antidepressant response. Patients with CT abnormalities showed higher baseline scores on Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) items “late insomnia” ( t=−2.674, P=.002), “somatic symptoms” ( t=−3.355 P=.002), and Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) item “emotional withdrawal” ( t=−3.355, P=.002). No significant correlation was found between the vascular index and baseline clinical symptoms, while the HAM-D “depressed mood” item was negatively correlated to the right frontal index ( R=−0.692, P=.006). Patients with CT abnormalities showed a lower reduction of HAM-D total scores than patients with normal CT (time effect: F=29.277, P<.0001; group effect: F=5.154, P<.03), while a significant reduction of symptoms in time (time effect: F=33.33, P<.0001) but no differences between groups were found on Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A). Both patients with and without mild cognitive impairment improved on the HAM-D (time effect: F=19.668, P<.0001), BPRS (time effect: F=18.345, P<.0001), and HAM-A (time effect: F=17.959, P<.0001) total scores. Patients with emotional withdrawal showed lower improvement on BPRS total scores (time effect: F=26.946, P<.0001; group effect: F=5.121, P<.03). The results from this study showed that patients with baseline emotional withdrawal and CT abnormalities have poorer outcome. Further investigations on larger samples are needed to confirm these findings.

A method for controlling for a high placebo response rate in a comparison of venlafaxine XR and diazepam in the short-term treatment of patients with generalised anxiety disorder

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study compared the efficacy of venlafaxine XR (75 or 150 mg/d) with diazepam (15 mg/d) over an 8-week treatment period in 540 non-depressed outpatients with generalised anxiety disorder (GAD). At week 8, significant improvements from baseline were observed in the venlafaxine XR, diazepam and placebo groups. Although these improvements were higher in the first two groups than in the placebo group for each of the primary efficacy variables (Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAM-A) total, HAM-A psychic anxiety factor, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HAD) anxiety sub-scale and Clinical Global Impression (CGI) improvement), there were no statistically significant differences between groups. These non-positive results were thought to be due to the very high placebo response observed in some centres. To understand the variability of the study, a secondary preplanned analysis was performed. This involved sub-dividing the study centres according to their ability to detect a two-point mean difference between diazepam and placebo at week 8 on the HAM-A total score. Centres able to show such a difference were termed verum-sensitive. Improvements from baseline to week 8 in venlafaxine XR-treated patients from verum-sensitive centres were significantly greater than in placebo on each of the primary efficacy measures ( P ≤ 0.05). This suggests that those centres able to detect an anxiolytic effect of diazepam were also able to detect an anxiolytic effect of venlafaxine XR. Significant differences in baseline demographics, rates of adverse event reporting and rates of patient discontinuations were noted between patients enrolled at verum-sensitive and verum-insensitive sites. These results reflect the importance of study centre selection in accurately determining efficacy in placebo-controlled trials.

Venlafaxine ER as a treatment for generalized anxiety disorder in older adults: pooled analysis of five randomized placebo-controlled clinical trials.

Concerns about the safety of benzodiazepines in older adults may have led investigators and clinicians to underestimate the importance of adequately treating generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) in later life. To evaluate the safety and efficacy profile of an alternative treatment in older patients, we conducted a secondary analysis of five randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of extended release venlafaxine (venlafaxine ER, Effexor XR) for adult patients with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) diagnosis of GAD. The five multicenter, parallel-group, double-blind, prospectively randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials used similar designs to evaluate short-term efficacy after 8 weeks. In addition, two studies evaluated efficacy and safety over 24 weeks under double-blind conditions. Outpatients from both primary care and specialty mental healthcare settings were included. Three studies were conducted in the United States and two in Europe. Intention-to-treat analyses included 1,839 adult outpatients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of GAD and total scores of > or =18 on the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA). Ten percent of the patients were aged 60 and older and 5.0% were aged 65 and older. Fixed or flexible doses of venlafaxine ER in the dose range of 37.5 to 225 mg/day or matched placebo were used for 8 weeks in all studies and for 24 weeks in two studies. Primary efficacy variables included the HAMA total score and psychic anxiety factor, the anxiety subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression (HAD) Scale, and the Clinical Global Impression of Improvement (CGI-I). Secondary efficacy variables included the HAMA somatic anxiety factor, the depression subscale of the HAD, CGI-3 severity, the Covi Scale for Anxiety, and the Raskin Scale for Depression. On the CGI, 66% of older patients (> or =60 years) responded to venlafaxine ER, compared with 41% for placebo (P <.01 by logistic regression). For younger patients (<60 years), comparable figures were 67% and 44%, respectively (P <.001). Analysis of variance showed no main effects for age and no age-by-treatment interactions for any of the primary or secondary efficacy outcome measures for either the 8- or 24-week analyses. Within the older adults subgroup, increasing age did not influence responses. In this cohort of GAD patients, higher levels of depression were associated with decreased responses of anxiety symptoms. In older adults, 23% of venlafaxine ER patients discontinued treatment prematurely versus 31% of those who received placebo; comparable figures for younger adult patients were 27% and 28%, respectively. Discontinuations due to adverse events were 15% versus 14% for venlafaxine ER and placebo, respectively, in older adults compared with 15% versus 8%, respectively, for younger adults. Venlafaxine ER is equally safe and well tolerated by and shows similar efficacy in younger and older patients in the treatment of GAD.