No abstract

Background: Antagonism of corticotropin‐releasing factor (CRF) receptors has been hypothesized as a potential target for the development of novel anxiolytics. This study was designed to determine the safety and efficacy of pexacerfont, a selective CRF‐1 receptor antagonist, in the treatment of generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Method: This was a multicenter, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled and active comparator trial. Two hundred and sixty patients were randomly assigned to pexacerfont 100 mg/day (after a 1 week loading dose of 300 mg/day), placebo or escitalopram 20 mg/day in a 2:2:1 ratio. The primary outcome was the mean change from baseline to end point (week 8) in the Hamilton Anxiety Scale total score. Results: Pexacerfont 100 mg/day did not separate from placebo on the primary outcome measure. The half‐powered active comparator arm, escitalopram 20 mg/day, demonstrated efficacy with significant separation from placebo at weeks 1, 2, 3, 6, and 8 (P<.02). Response rates for pexacerfont, placebo, and escitalopram were 42, 42, and 53%, respectively. Genetic and psychometric rating scale data was obtained in 175 randomized subjects. There was a significant association between a single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) of the gene encoding plexin A2 (PLXNA2‐2016) with the HAM‐A psychic subscale score for the entire cohort at baseline (FDR‐adjusted P=.015). Conclusions: Pexacerfont did not demonstrate efficacy compared to placebo for the treatment of GAD. Whether these findings are generalizable to this class of agents remains to be determined. Our preliminary genetic finding of an association between a SNP for the gene encoding plexin A2 and an anxiety phenotype in this study merits further exploration. The trial was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT00481325) before enrollment. Depression and Anxiety, 2010. © 2010 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

Glutamate release-inhibiting drugs may reduce the hyperglutamatergic consequences of NMDA receptor dysfunction implicated in the pathophysiologic processes of neuropsychiatric illnesses such as schizophrenia. Further study is needed.

Background: Bright light therapy was shown to be a promising treatment for depression during pregnancy in a recent open-label study. In an extension of this work, we report findings from a double-blind placebo-controlled pilot study. Method: Ten pregnant women with DSM-IV major depressive disorder were randomly assigned from April 2000 to January 2002 to a 5-week clinical trial with either a 7000 lux (active) or 500 lux (placebo) light box. At the end of the randomized controlled trial, subjects had the option of continuing in a 5-week extension phase. The Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Scale-Seasonal Affective Disorder Version was administered to assess changes in clinical status. Salivary melatonin was used to index circadian rhythm phase for comparison with antidepressant results. Results: Although there was a small mean group advantage of active treatment throughout the randomized controlled trial, it was not statistically significant. However, in the longer 10-week trial, the presence of active versus placebo light produced a clear treatment effect (p = .001) with an effect size (0.43) similar to that seen in antidepressant drug trials. Successful treatment with bright light was associated with phase advances of the melatonin rhythm. Conclusion: These findings provide additional evidence for an active effect of bright light therapy for antepartum depression and underscore the need for an expanded randomized clinical trial.

These data provide evidence that morning light therapy has an antidepressant effect during pregnancy. A randomized controlled trial is warranted to test this alternative to medication.