This randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study was the first to evaluate the antidepressant efficacy, safety, and tolerability of an NR2B subunit-selective N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, CP-101,606. Subjects had major depression, according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition criteria and a history of treatment refractoriness to least 1 adequate trial of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor. The study had 2 treatment periods. In period 1, subjects first received a 6-week open-label trial of paroxetine and a single-blind, intravenous placebo infusion. Period 1 nonresponders (n = 30) then received a randomized double-blind single infusion of CP-101,606 or placebo plus continued treatment with paroxetine for up to an additional 4 weeks (period 2). Depression severity was assessed using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale and 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale. On the prespecified main outcome measure (change from baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score at day 5 of period 2), CP-101,606 produced a greater decrease than did placebo (mean difference, 8.6; 80% confidence interval, -12.3 to -4.5) (P < 0.10). Hamilton Depression Rating Scale response rate was 60% for CP-101,606 versus 20% for placebo. Seventy-eight percent of CP-101,606-treated responders maintained response status for at least 1 week after the infusion. CP-101,606 was safe, generally well tolerated, and capable of producing an antidepressant response without also producing a dissociative reaction. Antagonism of the NR2B subtype of the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor may be a fruitful target for the development of a new antidepressant with more robust effects and a faster onset compared with those currently available and capable of working when existing antidepressants do not.
Background About one-third of patients with depression fail to achieve remission despite treatment with multiple antidepressants and are considered to have treatment-resistant depression. Methods This Phase 3, double-blind, multicenter study enrolled adults with moderate-to-severe depression and nonresponse to ≥2 antidepressants in the current depression episode. Eligible patients (N = 346) were randomized (1:1:1) to twice-weekly nasal spray treatment (esketamine [56 or 84 mg] or placebo) plus a newly initiated, open-label, oral antidepressant taken daily for 4 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline to day 28 in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale total score, performed by blinded, remote raters. Based on the predefined statistical testing sequence, esketamine 84 mg/antidepressant had to be significant for esketamine 56 mg/antidepressant to be formally tested. Results Statistical significance was not achieved with esketamine 84 mg/antidepressant compared with antidepressant/placebo (least squares [LS] means difference [95% CI]: –3.2 [–6.88, 0.45]; 2-sided P value = .088). Although esketamine 56 mg/antidepressant could not be formally tested, the LS means difference was –4.1 [–7.67, –0.49] (nominal 2-sided P value = .027). The most common (>20%) adverse events reported for esketamine/antidepressant were nausea, dissociation, dizziness, vertigo, and headache. Conclusions Statistical significance was not achieved for the primary endpoint; nevertheless, the treatment effect (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale) for both esketamine/antidepressant groups exceeded what has been considered clinically meaningful for approved antidepressants vs placebo. Safety was similar between esketamine/antidepressant groups and no new dose-related safety concerns were identified. This study provides supportive evidence for the safety and efficacy of esketamine nasal spray as a new, rapid-acting antidepressant for patients with treatment-resistant depression. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02417064
Background: Indirect evidence suggests that the antidepressant venlafaxine hydrochloride selectively inhibits serotonin (5-HT) uptake at low doses, whereas at high doses, it inhibits both 5-HT and norepinephrine (NE) uptake. We hypothesized that, in vivo, both high and low doses would inhibit the 5-HT uptake of platelets but that the higher dose would differentially blunt the pressor response to tyramine, a marker for NE uptake.
The efficacy and safety of a selective NK 1 antagonist, L-759274, was investigated in outpatients with diagnosis of major depressive disorder with melancholic features, following evidence obtained with the novel compound aprepitant that Substance P (NK 1 ) antagonists may provide a unique mechanism of antidepressant activity. A randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled study was carried out. Patients, male or female, aged 18-60, scoring X25 points on total of first 17 items of 21-item Hamilton Depression Scale (HAMD), and scoring X4 (moderately ill) on Clinical Global Impressions-Severity Scale were randomized to oral L-759274 40 mg daily (n ¼ 66) or placebo (n ¼ 62) for 6 weeks. For patients receiving L-759274, improvement (mean decrease from baseline) in HAMD-17 total score was 10.7 points, compared with a mean 7.8 point improvement in patients receiving placebo (po0.009). Mean scores for item 1 of HAMD-17 (depressed mood) also improved to a greater extent in the active group compared with the placebo group (0.3 points, po0.058). Compared with placebo, mean scores on Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement Scale improved significantly by the end of the trial (p ¼ 0.009). L-759274 was generally safe and well-tolerated. The incidence of sexual side effects was on par with that observed in patients receiving placebo, and the incidences of gastrointestinal effects were low. Antidepressant actions have now been observed with two different highly selective NK 1 antagonists (aprepitant and L-759274). NK 1 antagonism is a replicated and generally welltolerated antidepressant mechanism.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.