university of groningen lamotrigine in bipolar depression ... · bipolar disorder (manic-depressive...

University of Groningen

Lamotrigine in bipolar depressionvan der Loos, Marcus Lambertus Maria

IMPORTANT NOTE: You are advised to consult the publisher's version (publisher's PDF) if you wish to cite fromit. Please check the document version below.

Document VersionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Publication date:2011

Link to publication in University of Groningen/UMCG research database

Citation for published version (APA):van der Loos, M. L. M. (2011). Lamotrigine in bipolar depression: a randomised placebo-controlled trial onthe acute and long-term outcome of lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition ofparoxetine. Groningen: [s.n.].

CopyrightOther than for strictly personal use, it is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of theauthor(s) and/or copyright holder(s), unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons).

Take-down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.

Downloaded from the University of Groningen/UMCG research database (Pure): http://www.rug.nl/research/portal. For technical reasons thenumber of authors shown on this cover page is limited to 10 maximum.

Download date: 02-08-2020

https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/en/publications/lamotrigine-in-bipolar-depression(0501e989-d59f-4375-8da4-08bf71be05dd).html




Stellingen

1. Detoevoegingvanlamotrigineaanlithiumbijpatiëntenmeteenbipolairestoornisgedurendeeendepressieveepisodeiseffectiefenveilig(ditproefschrift).

2. Verschillendestappenvanadditievanmedicatietijdenseendepressieveepisodevandebipolairestoornisisnietalleen‘careasusual’,hetisookteonderbouwen(ditproefschrift).

3. Onderzoeknaaradditie-strategieënbijdebehandelingvanbipolairestoornissenisnodig,nuttigenmogelijk(ditproefschrift).

4. Hetismogelijkombinnenéénstudiedrieachtereenvolgendestappenindebehandelingvandebipolairestoornisteonderzoeken(ditproefschrift).

5. Dekwaliteitvanhetseparatiebeleidineenpsychiatrischziekenhuisafmetenaaneenverplichtedalingvanhetaantalseparatiesmet10procentisabsurdendoetgeenrechtaandeernstvandesituatievandepatiënt.

6. Deangstvoorsamenwerkingmetdefarmaceutischeindustrieiseenremopkwalitatiefhoogwaardigonderzoeken‘evidencebasedmedicine’.

7. Marketeerszijneringeslaagdmensentedoengelovendatkamperenhetoptimumaanvrijheidenprivacybetekent.

8. Hetbelangvanhethebbenvaneeneigenmeningwordtinhetalgemeenschromelijkoverschat.

9. Gelukkigzijnernogsteedsmensendienietdoenwatzezeggenenvooralnietzeggenwatzedenken.

10.Hysterieisalsdiagnosenietverdwenenomdathetziektebeeldnietmeerbestaatmaaromdatdisproportioneelreagerennormaalisgeworden.

11.‘Socialmedia’iseencontradictiointerminus.

MarcvanderLoos

Lamotrigine in bipolar depression: a randomised placebo-controlled trial on the acute and long-term outcome

of lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine

28september2011

LAMOTRIGINEIN BIPOLAR DEPRESSIONa randomised placebo-controlled trial on the acute and long-term outcome of lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine

Marc van der Loos

Cover designKoen Kloosterhuis, May 2011

Design and lay-outGoedbezigNaarden, the Netherlands

PrintBrügemann B.V.Hilversum, the Netherlands

ISBN: 978-90-9026249-9

Copyright© 2011 M.L.M. van der Loos

No part of this book may be reproduced in any form without permission of the author.

RIJKSUNIVERSITEIT GRONINGEN

Proefschrift

ter verkrijging van het doctoraat in de Medische Wetenschappen

aan de Rijksuniversiteit Groningen op gezag van de

Rector Magnificus, dr E. Sterken,in het openbaar te verdedigen op woensdag 28 september 2011

om 11.00 uur

door

Marcus Lambertus Maria van der Loosgeboren op 10 maart 1958

te Amsterdam

LAMOTRIGINEIN BIPOLAR DEPRESSIONa randomised placebo-controlled trial on the acute and long-term outcome of lamotrigine as add-on to lithium

with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine

Promotor: Prof dr W.A. Nolen

Beoordelingscommissie: Prof dr R.A. Schroevers

Prof dr R.W. Kupka

Prof J.R. Calabrese M.D.

Ah, si j’avais pu travailler sans cette sacré maladie! Que de chôses j’aurais fait isolé des

autres selon que le pays m’en dirait. Mais oui - c’est bien fini ce voyage ci.

Ah, if I’d been able to work without this bloody illness! How many things I could have done,

isolated from the others, according to what the land would tell me.

But yes - this journey is well and truly finished

To Theo van Gogh. Saint-Rémy-de-Provence, on or about Thursday, 1 May 1890

Letter 865, Vincent van Gogh

Contents

Chapter1 Introduction.......................................................................... 11

Chapter2 Lamotrigine in bipolar disorder: an overview........................... 25

Chapter3 Efficacy and Safety of Lamotrigine as Add-On Treatment to Lithium in Bipolar Depression: A Multicenter, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial......................................................... 47

Chapter4 Efficacy and safety of two treatment algorithms in bipolar depression consisting of a combination of lithium, lamotrigine or placebo and paroxetine.................................................... 71

Chapter5 Long-term outcome of bipolar depressed patients receiving lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a novel design............................. 95

Chapter6 Discussion.......................................................................... 115

Summary........................................................................... 135

Samenvatting..................................................................... 145

Curriculum Vitae M.L.M. van der Loos................................... 155

Dankwoord (Acknowledgments)........................................... 161

13

1

Introduction

14 Chapter 114

Foreword

Bipolardisorder(manic-depressiveillness)isoneofthegreatandmaybethemostintriguingofpsychiatricdiseases,notonlybecauseofitshighprevalencebutalsobecauseofitsspreadingthroughtimeandcultures.ThechangeofmoodoverashorttimehasalreadybeendescribedbyancientGreeksasadisturbanceoftheequilibriumbetweenyellowandblackbile.Whereanexcessofyellowbilewasresponsiblefor(hypo)manicepisodes,anexcessofblackbilewasacauseofmelancholia.Thetermmanic-depressiveillness(manisch-depressieveIrresein)wasintroducedbyKraepelin(1)in1899.Themoderntermbipolardisorder(whichgivesalsothelesssevere(hypo)manicepisodesaplaceanddifferentiatesbetweenunipolarandbipolardisorders)wasintroducedin1957byLeonard(2).

Thecorecharacteristicofbipolardisorderisthealternationinmoodbetweenhigh,lowand‘normal’.Moreover,therearechangesinenergy,selfesteem,sexualdesire,needofsleep,keepingrelationswithotherpeople.Inthemostseriousformspsychosis,rage,andsuicidecandestroyorevenendlives.InthisthesiswewillusetheclassificationofbipolardisordersaccordingtotheDSM-IV(3)(table1,page18,19,20and21).

Theinstabilityofthecorecharacteristicsofthe‘self’ofpatientsmaybeoneoftheheaviestburdensofthisdisease.“WhoamI?Anenergetic,attractive,confidentoutgoingbigspenderwhorulestheworldortheslow,gloomy,tired,suicidalbunchofmiseryormaybesomethinginbetween?HowcanIrelyonmyself,makeappointments,livetogether,raisechildren,followastudy,findandkeepajob,etceterawhenthereisnostable‘Me’?”Questionsenoughforpatientsbutalsoforrelativesandtreatingphysicians.

Therecanbeagreatdiscrepancybetweenthegoalsofthephysicianandthepatient.Themainproblemisthedefinitionof‘stability’.Whereaspatientsmayperceivestabilityasplainandboring,familymembersanddoctorsmay

15

1Introduction 15

regardsuchasituationasdesirable.ThefrequentlyusedquestionnairestoassessseverityofillnesssuchastheMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS)(4),theHamiltonDepressionRatingScale(HAM-D)(5),andtheYoungManiaRatingScale(YMRS)(6)arealldesignedtomeasurethepresenceandseverity(orabsence)ofsymptoms.Theydon’tsaymuchaboutfunctioningofthepatientorhissatisfactionwithlife.Formanypatientshypomaniaorevenmaniaisthemostsoughtaftersituation.Asonepatientoncestated:“IpreferbeingsecludedonceinafewyearsaslongasIdon’thavetotakelithiumandfeelnothingatall”.

Inoursocietythereisagreatpressureonbeingenthusiastic,active,outgoing,sexualactive,etcetera.Infactthesecharacteristicscanalsoberegardedassymptomsofhypomania.Forthatreasonitisnotsostrangethatdrugslikecocaineandamphetamineswhichcanbringusersinaeuphoric(or“hypomanic”)state,aresopopular.Andeventhedepressionandinsomniawhichcomeaftertheeuphoria,arecomparablewiththedepressiveepisodeswhichcomessooftenaftera(hypo)manicepisode.Inthebeginningthesedrugsweremostlyusedintheglamorousworldofart,filmandfashion.Butalsoinbipolardisorderthereisalwaysahintofromanticismandartistry.In1993KayRedfieldJamesonwrote‘Touchedwithfire’,abookabouttheassociationoftheartistictemperamentwithbipolardisorder.ThefirstsentenceofthisbookisaquotefromLordByron:“Wewritersareallinsane”.Thisromanticviewofdiseaseisinthemedicalworldexclusiveforpsychiatricdiseases;Patientssufferingfromaddictionareviewedas‘bohemien’,schizophrenicpatientsarehiddengeniuses(see:AbeautifulMind(SylviaNasar1998))andlastbutnotleastbipolarpatientsare‘artists’.Especiallyhypomanicepisodeswerehardlyseenaspartofadiseasebutmoreastheholygrailofpsychiatry.Astateofmindwhichgiveswaytoallkindsofartisticeruptions.Theothersideofthishighmood;thedepressionisafarlesssexykindofmooddisorder,aprizetobepaidpreferentiallyinsilence.Thissilenceisbestdemonstratedwith932hitsinPubmed®forthecombinationofthesearchterms‘bipolardepression’and‘randomisedcontrolledtrial’versus13066hitsforthecombination’depression’

16 Chapter 116

and‘randomisedcontrolledtrial’. Inthisthesiswetrytoaddsomeknowledgetothetreatmentofthebipolardepression;anunderstudiedbutverysignificantmedicalproblem.

Stabilizing mood and treatment of depression

Althoughsufferingandalsomortalityduetosuicideishighinbipolardepression,thefocusofresearchintothetreatmentofbipolardisorderhasuntilrecentlybeenmostlyontheacutetreatmentofmanicepisodes(e.g.withantipsychotics)andonmaintenancetreatment(e.g.withlithium).Thetreatmentofbipolardepressionwashardlystudiedasapparentlythesametreatmentswereusedasforunipolar(i.e.non-bipolar)depression:initiallysincethe1940ieselectroconvulsivetherapy(ECT)andsincethe1950iesand1960iestheantidepressants,originallythetricyclicantidepressants(TCAs)andmonoamineoxidaseinhibitors(MAOIs)andlatertheselectiveserotoninreuptakeinhibitors(SSRIs)andotherrelatedcompounds.Onlyafterthe1980iestherebecamesomeinterestforalternativesforthesetreatments,especiallywhenitbecameevidentthattheregularantidepressantsmightalsoinduceaswitchto(hypo)maniaandanincreaseofepisodefrequency;cycleacceleration(7;8).

Withtheintroductionoflithiuminthe1970ies(9)therebecamealsointerestintreatmentsthatwereeffectiveagainstbothpoles(maniaanddepression)oftheillness,notonlytoreducethesymptomsofthemoodepisodes(asacutetreatment)butalsotopreventfurtherepisodes,aslong-termormaintenancetreatment.Forthelatterpurposethequestwasfora‘moodstabilizer’.Themainproblemwiththisconceptisthattheterm‘moodstabilizer’hasmanydefinitions.Themoststringentdefinitionisthatatrue‘moodstabilizer’demonstratesefficacyintheacutetreatmentofbothmanicanddepressiveepisodesandpreventsagainstfurthermanicanddepressiveepisodes(fig1).

17

1Introduction 17

Figure 1. Whatisamoodstabilizer?

1. Effective in treating acute mania

• Bothacutelyandincontinuation

• Withoutcausingdepression

2.Effectiveintreatingacutebipolardepression

• Bothacutelyandincontinuation

• Withoutcausingmania

3.Effectiveinpreventingrecurrenceofbothmaniaanddepression(prophylaxis)

• (Andalsoinrapidcycling)

Figure 2.Treatments“fromabove”and“frombelow”

Stabilizefrombothsides

Stabilizefromabove

Stabilizefrombelow

Treatfrombelow

Treatfromabove

Mania

Symptoms

“Normalcy”

Symptoms

Depression

18 Chapter 118

Theloosestdefinitionrequiresefficacyinonlyonepolewithoutworseningoftheotherpole.Althoughitisinouropinionjustifiedtouseastrictdefinition,itmakessensetodifferentiatebetweenmoodstabilizingfrombelow(i.e.todiminishdepression)andmoodstabilizingfromabove(i.e.todiminishmania)(10).

Untilrecentlylithiumcameclosesttomeetingthestrictestdefinitionasa‘moodstabilizer’.Alsovalproicacid/valproateandcarbamazepineclaimedthistermbutunfortunatelyallthreecompoundswereconsidered(andpartlyalsofound)moreeffectiveintreatingandpreventingmanicepisodesthandepressiveepisodes.Asaresult,bipolardepressedpatientsweremostlytreatedwithantidepressantswhichhadlargelybeentestedonlyinunipolardepression.Asevidencegrewthattheefficacyofantidepressantsislimited(11;12)andthattheremaybetheriskofinductionof(hypo)maniaorcycleacceleration(7;8),thetreatmentofbipolardepressionbecameanunmetneed:foramoodstabilizerfrombelowwithoutinducinga(hypo)manicepisode(fig2).

Lamotrigine

Aftersomecasereportsinthe1990ies(13;14)itbecameclearthatlamotriginemightbesuchadrug.In1999,thefirstrandomized,placebo-controlledtrialshowedefficacyoflamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression,althoughnotontheapriorichosenprimaryoutcomemeasure(theHAM-D)butonlyonsecondaryoutcomemeasures(e.g.theMADRS)(15).However,foursubsequentstudiescouldnotreplicatethisfinding(16).Atthesametimetwootherrandomizedplacebo-controlledtrialsstudyingthelong-termeffectoflamotrigineshowedapreventiveeffectagainstfurtherdepressiveepisodesbutnotagainstmanicepisodes,whileinthesamestudieslithiumwasfoundeffectiveinthepreventionofmanicepisodesbutnotofdepressiveepisodes(17;18).

Thisbroughtustotheideatostartadouble-blindrandomizedplacebo-controlledtrialintotheeffectoflamotrigineasadd-ontoongoingtreatment

19

1Introduction 19

withlithiuminpatientswithabipolardepression.DuringPhaseIofthatstudylamotrigineorplacebowasaddedtoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumfor8weeks.After8weeksresponderscontinuedtheircombinationofmedicationwhereasparoxetinewasaddedopenlabelinnon-respondersinbothgroups(lithiumpluslamotrigineandlithiumplusplacebo)(PhaseII).At16weeksresponderscontinuedtheirmedicationregimeandwerefolloweduntilanewdepressiveor(hypo)manicrelapseoruntilthemaximumdurationofthestudy(68weeks)(Follow-up).

Outline of this thesis

InchapterIIwewillreviewthepharmacologicalprofileandtheplaceoflamotrigineinbipolardisorder. InchapterIIItheresultsobtainedduringthefirst8weeksofthestudy(phaseI)willbediscussed. InchapterIVtheresultsobtainedduringweek9-16(phaseII)willbediscussed. InchapterVtheresultsobtainedduringfollow-up(until68weeks)ofrespondersatweek16willbediscussed. InchapterVItheoverallresultsofourstudyandmorespecificallytheplaceoflamotrigineamongtheotheroptionsinthetreatmentofbipolardepressionandtheadvantagesanddisadvantagesofthedesignofourstudyincomparisonwithotherlong-termstudiesthathavebeenperformedinbipolardisorderwillbediscussed.Finally,somesuggestionsforfutureresearchwillbepresented.

20 Chapter 120

Bipolar II Disorder-Diagnostic Features

TheessentialfeatureofBipolarIIDisorderisaclinicalcoursethatischaracterizedbytheoccurrenceofoneormoreMajorDepressiveEpisodesaccompaniedbyatleastoneHypomanicEpisode.HypomanicEpisodesshouldnotbeconfusedwiththeseveraldaysofeuthymiathatmayfollowremissionofaMajorDepressiveEpisode.EpisodesofSubstance-InducedMoodDisorder(duetothedirecteffectsofamedication,orothersomatictreatmentsfordepression,adrugofabuse,ortoxinexposure)orofMoodDisorderDuetoaGeneralMedicalConditiondonotcounttowardadiagnosisofBipolarIDisorder.Inaddition,theepisodesarenotbetteraccountedforbySchizoaffectiveDisorderandarenotsuperimposedonSchizophrenia,SchizophreniformDisorder,DelusionalDisorder,orPsychoticDisorderNotOtherwiseSpecified.

Criteria for Major Depressive Episode

A.Five(ormore)ofthefollowingsymptomshavebeenpresentduringthesame2-weekperiodandrepresentachangefrompreviousfunctioning;atleastoneofthesymptomsiseither(1)depressedmoodor(2)lossofinterestorpleasure

Note:Donotincludesymptomsthatareclearlyduetoageneralmedicalcondition,ormood-incongruentdelusionsorhallucinations.

1.depressedmoodmostoftheday,nearlyeveryday,asindicatedbyeithersubjectivereport(e.g.,feelssadorempty)orobservationmadebyothers(e.g.appearstearful).Note:Inchildrenandadolescents,canbeirritablemood.

2.markedlydiminishedinterestorpleasureinall,oralmostall,activitiesmostoftheday,nearlyeveryday(asindicatedbyeithersubjectiveaccountorobservationmadebyothers)

3.significantweightlosswhennotdietingorweightgain(e.g.,achangeofmorethan5%ofbodyweightinamonth),ordecreaseorincreaseinappetitenearlyeveryday.Note:Inchildren,considerfailuretomakeexpectedweightgains.

4.insomniaorhypersomnianearlyeveryday5.psychomotoragitationorretardationnearlyeveryday(observablebyothers,

notmerelysubjectivefeelingsofrestlessnessorbeingsloweddown)6.fatigueorlossofenergynearlyeveryday

Table 1

21

1Introduction 21

7.feelingsofworthlessnessorexcessiveorinappropriateguilt(whichmaybedelusional)nearlyeveryday(notmerelyself-reproachorguiltaboutbeingsick)

8.diminishedabilitytothinkorconcentrate,orindecisiveness,nearlyeveryday(eitherbysubjectiveaccountorasobservedbyothers)

9.recurrentthoughtsofdeath(notjustfearofdying),recurrentsuicidalideationwithoutaspecificplan,orasuicideattemptoraspecificplanforcommittingsuicide

B.ThesymptomsdonotmeetcriteriaforaMixedEpisode.

C.Thesymptomscauseclinicallysignificantdistressorimpairmentinsocial,occupational,orotherimportantareasoffunctioning.

D.Thesymptomsarenotduetothedirectphysiologicaleffectsofasubstance(e.g.,adrugofabuse,amedication)orageneralmedicalcondition(e.g.,hypothyroidism).

E.Thesymptomsarenotbetteraccountedforbybereavement,i.e.,afterthelossofalovedone,thesymptomspersistforlongerthan2monthsorarecharacterizedbymarkedfunctionalimpairment,morbidpreoccupationwithworthlessness,suicidalideation,psychoticsymptoms,orpsychomotorretardation.

Criteria for Manic Episode

A.Adistinctperiodofabnormallyandpersistentlyelevated,expansive,orirritablemood,lastingatleast1week(oranydurationifhospitalizationisnecessary).

B.Duringtheperiodofmooddisturbance,three(ormore)ofthefollowingsymptomshavepersisted(fourifthemoodisonlyirritable)andhavebeenpresenttoasignificantdegree:1.inflatedself-esteemorgrandiosity2.decreasedneedforsleep(e.g.,feelsrestedafteronly3hoursofsleep)3.moretalkativethanusualorpressuretokeeptalking4.flightofideasorsubjectiveexperiencethatthoughtsareracing5.distractibility(i.e.,attentiontooeasilydrawntounimportantorirrelevant

externalstimuli)

22 Chapter 122

6.increaseingoal-directedactivity(eithersocially,atworkorschool,orsexually)orpsychomotoragitation

7.excessiveinvolvementinpleasurableactivitiesthathaveahighpotentialforpainfulconsequences(e.g.,engaginginunrestrainedbuyingsprees,sexualindiscretions,orfoolishbusinessinvestments)

C.ThesymptomsdonotmeetcriteriaforaMixedEpisode.

D.Themooddisturbanceissufficientlyseveretocausemarkedimpairmentinoccupationalfunctioningorinusualsocialactivitiesorrelationshipswithothers,ortonecessitatehospitalizationtopreventharmtoselforothers,ortherearepsychoticfeatures.

E.Thesymptomsarenotduetothedirectphysiologicaleffectsofasubstance(e.g.,adrugofabuse,amedication,orothertreatments)orageneralmedicalcondition(e.g.,hyperthyroidism).

Note:Manic-likeepisodesthatareclearlycausedbysomaticantidepressanttreatment(e.g.,medication,electroconvulsivetherapy,lighttherapy)shouldnotcounttowardadiagnosisofBipolarIDisorder.

Criteria for Mixed Episode

A.ThecriteriaaremetbothforaManicEpisodeandforaMajorDepressiveEpisode(exceptforduration)nearlyeverydayduringatleasta1-weekperiod.

B.Themooddisturbanceissufficientlyseveretocausemarkedimpairmentinoccupationalfunctioningorinusualsocialactivitiesorrelationshipswithothers,ortonecessitatehospitalizationtopreventharmtoselforothers,ortherearepsychoticfeatures.

C.Thesymptomsarenotduetothedirectphysiologicaleffectsofasubstance(e.g.,adrugofabuse,amedication,orothertreatment)orageneralmedicalcondition(e.g.,hyperthyroidism).

Criteria for Hypomanic Episode

23

1Introduction 23

A.Adistinctperiodofpersistentlyelevated,expansive,orirritablemood,lastingthroughoutatleast4days,thatisclearlydifferentfromtheusualnondepressedmood.

B.Duringtheperiodofmooddisturbance,three(ormore)ofthefollowingsymptomshavepersisted(fourifthemoodisonlyirritable)andhavebeenpresenttoasignificantdegree:1.inflatedself-esteemorgrandiosity2.decreasedneedforsleep(e.g.,feelsrestedafteronly3hoursofsleep)3.moretalkativethanusualorpressuretokeeptalking4.flightofideasorsubjectiveexperiencethatthoughtsareracing5.distractibility(i.e.,attentiontooeasilydrawntounimportantorirrelevant

externalstimuli)6.increaseingoal-directedactivity(eithersocially,atworkorschool,orsexually)

orpsychomotoragitation7.excessiveinvolvementinpleasurableactivitiesthathaveahighpotentialfor

painfulconsequences(e.g.,engaginginunrestrainedbuyingsprees,sexualindiscretions,orfoolishbusinessinvestments)

C.Theepisodeisassociatedwithanunequivocalchangeinfunctioningthatisuncharacteristicofthepersonwhennotsymptomatic.

D.Thedisturbanceinmoodandthechangeinfunctioningareobservablebyothers.

E.Theepisodeisnotsevereenoughtocausemarkedimpairmentinsocialoroccupationalfunctioning,ortonecessitatehospitalization,andtherearenopsychoticfeatures.

F.Thesymptomsarenotduetothedirectphysiologicaleffectsofasubstance(e.g.,adrugofabuse,amedication,orothertreatment)orageneralmedicalcondition(e.g.,hyperthyroidism).

Note:Hypomanic-likeepisodesthatareclearlycausedbysomaticantidepressanttreatment(e.g.,medication,electroconvulsivetherapy,lighttherapy)shouldnot

counttowardadiagnosisofBipolarIIDisorder.

24 Chapter 124

References

1. E.Kraepelin.Psychiatrie.EinLehrbuchfurStudirendeundAerzte.IIBandSechsteAuflage.Leipzig,VerlagvonJohannAmbrosiusBarth.1899.

2. K.Leonhard.AufteilungderEndogenenPsychosen.Berlin,AcademieVerlag.1957.

3. AmericanPsychiatricAssociation.DiagnosticandStatisticalManualofMentalDisorders,4thEdition(DSM-IV).WashingtonDC,AmericanPsychiatricPress.1994.

4. MontgomerySA,ÅsbergM.Anewdepressionscaledesignedtobesensitivetochange.BrJPsychiatry1979Apr;134:382-9.

5. HAMILTONM.Aratingscalefordepression.JNeurolNeurosurgPsychiatry1960Feb;23:56-62.

6. YoungRC,NysewanderRW,SchreiberMT.Maniascalescores,signs,andsymptomsinfortyinpatients.JClinPsychiatry1983Mar;44(3):98-100.

7. AltshulerLL,PostRM,LeverichGS,MikalauskasK,RosoffA,AckermanL.Antidepressant-inducedmaniaandcycleacceleration:acontroversyrevisited.AmJPsychiatry1995Aug;152(8):1130-8.

8. LichtRW,GijsmanH,NolenWA,AngstJ.Areantidepressantssafeinthetreatmentofbipolardepression?Acriticalevaluationoftheirpotentialrisktoinduceswitchintomaniaorcycleacceleration.ActaPsychiatrScand2008Nov;118(5):337-46.

9. SCHOUM,JUEL-NIELSENN,STROMGRENE,VOLDBYH.Thetreatmentofmanicpsychosesbytheadministrationoflithiumsalts.JNeurolNeurosurgPsychiatry1954Nov;17(4):250-60.

10. KetterTA,CalabreseJR.Stabilizationofmoodfrombelowversusabovebaselineinbipolardisorder:anewnomenclature.JClinPsychiatry2002Feb;63(2):146-51.

11.GhaemiSN,WingoAP,FilkowskiMA,BaldessariniRJ.Long-termantidepressanttreatmentinbipolardisorder:meta-analysesofbenefitsandrisks.ActaPsychiatrScand2008Aug24.

25

1Introduction 25

12. SachsGS,NierenbergAA,CalabreseJR,MarangellLB,WisniewskiSR,GyulaiL,etal.Effectivenessofadjunctiveantidepressanttreatmentforbipolardepression.NEnglJMed2007Apr26;356(17):1711-22.

13. SmithD,BakerG,DaviesG,DeweyM,ChadwickDW.Outcomesofadd-ontreatmentwithlamotrigineinpartialepilepsy.Epilepsia1993Mar;34(2):312-22.

14.CalabreseJR,FatemiSH,WoyshvilleMJ.Antidepressanteffectsoflamotrigineinrapidcyclingbipolardisorder.AmJPsychiatry1996Sep;153(9):1236.

15.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGS,AscherJA,MonaghanE,RuddGD.Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup.JClinPsychiatry1999Feb;60(2):79-88.

16.CalabreseJR,HuffmanRF,WhiteRL,EdwardsS,ThompsonTR,AscherJA,etal.Lamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:resultsoffivedouble-blind,placebo-controlledclinicaltrials.BipolarDisord2008Mar;10(2):323-33.

17.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsG,YathamLN,BehnkeK,MehtonenOP,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlydepressedpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.JClinPsychiatry2003Sep;64(9):1013-24.

18. BowdenCL,CalabreseJR,SachsG,YathamLN,AsgharSA,HomplandM,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003Apr;60(4):392-400.

27

Lamotrigine in bipolar disorder: an overview

MarcL.M.vanderLoos(1)JosephR.Calabrese,M.D.(2)WillemA.Nolen(3)DavidJ.Muzina,M.D.(4)

1.DepartmentofPsychiatry,IsalaKlinieken,locationSophia,Zwolle,theNetherlands

2.CaseWesternReserveUniversitySchoolofMedicine,UniversityHospitalsofCleveland,Cleveland,Ohio,USA

3.DepartmentofPsychiatry,UniversityMedicalCenterGroningen,UniversityofGroningen,Groningen,theNetherlands

4.DepartmentofPsychiatryandPsychology,ClevelandClinicFoundation,Cleveland,Ohio

Thischapterisanadaptationfrom:Chapter 4 Pharmacological profile and clinical utility of lamotrigine in mood disordersBipolar Psychopharmacotherapy: Caring for the Patient, 2nd EditionHagopS.Akiskal(Editor),MauricioTohen(Editor)Wiley-BlackwellJohnWiley&Sons,Ltd.

2

28 Chapter 228

Introduction

Thereremainsapressingneedforadditionaltreatmentoptionsformooddisorders,particularlythoserefractoryordifficulttotreatdisorderssuchasbipolardisorder.EstimatesoftheprevalenceofbipolarIdisorderacrossdiverseculturesandethnicgroupsareconsistent,rangingbetween0.4%and1.6%inadults(Weissman1996andRegeer2004).Recentestimatesoftheoverallprevalenceofbipolardisorder(typesIandIIaswellasNOS)suggestthat4-5%suffersfromthisdebilitatingmentaldisorder(Hirschfeld.2003;Regeer2004).Bipolardisorderscarriesahighburden,negativelyaffectinglivesinmanyareas,mostnotablytheperformanceofwork-related,leisure,andinterpersonalactivities(Calabrese2003).Thegreatestneedexistsinthetreatmentofdepressiveepisodesassociatedwithbipolardisordersassymptomsofdepressionaremuchmorecommonlyexperiencedandmoredifficulttotreatthanmanicsymptoms(Post2002;Judd2002andKupka2005). Reportsoflamotrigine’sbeneficialeffectsonmoodinepilepsypatientsledtoitsuseandstudyinaffectivedisorders.Studiesinvolvingbipolarpatientssuggestedthatlamotriginepossessedabroadspectrumoftherapeuticactivityinbipolardisorder,withlaterdescriptionsofgreaterefficacyfordepressivethanformanicsymptoms.Giventhesignificantburden,prevalence,andrecurrentnatureofbipolardisorder-especiallybipolardepression–lamotrigineappearstobegintoaddressanareaofseriousunmetpublichealthneed(Calabrese2003).

Clinical Pharmacology of Lamotrigine

Pharmacodynamics Lamotrigineisanantiepilepticdrugofthephenyltriazineclassthathasdemonstratedefficacyasadd-ontreatmentofpartialseizures(Mikati1989;Matsuo1993)andasmaintenancetreatmentofbipolarIdisordertodelaythetimeofoccurrenceofmoodepisodes(Bowden2003;Calabrese2003).Althoughitsmechanismoftherapeuticactioninhumansisnotdefinitivelyunderstood,lamotrigineisthoughttopossessmodulatoryandprotectiveeffects

2929

2


onneurotransmissionandintracellularsignaltransductionprocesses. Structurallydistinctfromotherantiepilepticdrugs,lamotrigineinteractspreferentiallyontheslowinactivatedstateofpresynapticneuronalsodiumandcalciumchannelstoprolonginactivationoftheneuronandpromotestabilizationoftheneuronalmembrane(Xie1998).Thiseffectisaugmentedbyause-dependentactioninwhichfurtherinhibitionbythedrugdevelopsduringrapid,repetitivestimulation(i.e.,epileptiformbursts).Consequently,thereleaseoftheexcitatoryaminoacidglutamateisantagonized(Fitton1995,LiandKetter2002).Lamotriginehasalsobeenobservedtoinhibitcorticalandamygdaloidkindling(Gilman1995,Leach1986andXie1995). Lamotriginehasnosubstantialinvitroaffinityforadenosine,adrenergic,dopaminergic,muscarinicandopioidreceptorsatclinicallyapplicableconcentrationsandbindsonlyweaklytoinhibitserotonin5HT3receptors(Leach1991).Lamotriginelacksclinicallymeaningfulactivityatthe5HT1Areceptor,wherechangesin5HT1Areceptor-mediatedcyclicadenosinemonophosphatepathwayhavebeenimplicatedinaffectivedisorders(Shiah1998andVinod2002). Inearlyepilepsystudieswithlamotrigineitwasnotedthatmanypatientsreportedimprovementinmoodandpsychologicalwell-beingindependentfromreductioninseizurefrequency,whichledtoitsinvestigationforuseinaffectivedisorders(Smith1993a;Smith1993b).Significantly,lamotriginehasminimalnegativeeffectsoncognitive,memory,orpsychomotorfunctionandisnotassociatedwithsedativeeffectsorweightgain(Goa1993,Cohen1985andGinsberg2003).

Pharmacokinetics Lamotrigineisextensivelyabsorbeddemonstratinglinearkinetics,resultingin98%bioavailability(Garnett1997).Peakplasmaconcentrationsareattainedafter1-3hourswithmeanplasmaproteinbindingof55-68%(Cohen1987,Ramsay,1991andRambeck1993).Lamotriginereadilycrossestheplacentalbarriercausingfetalbloodconcentrationssimilartomaternallevelsandpassesintobreastmilkreaching40-80%ofthematernallamotrigine

30 Chapter 230

concentration(Ohman,2000andPennell2003). Therate-limitingstepintheeliminationoflamotrigineisN-glucoronidationbytheliverwithaplasmaeliminationhalf-lifeof25+10hours(Cohen1987).Autoinductionofitsownmetabolismdoesnotoccurandtherearenoactivemetabolites.Pregnancyincreaseslamotrigineclearancebymorethan50%earlyduringpregnancyandrevertsquicklyafterdelivery(Tran2002).Clearancemaybereducedintheelderlyandinpatientswithmoderatetoseverehepaticdysfunction.

Drug Interactions Lamotrigineadministrationaffectshardlytheserumconcentrationsofotherdrugs.However,enzyme-inhibitingdrugssuchasdivalproexsodiumincreaselamotrigineconcentrationsbysignificantlycompetingformetabolismthroughglucoronidationeffectivelyincreasingthemeanhalf-lifeoflamotriginetoabout70hours(Yuen1992andAnderson1996).Enzyme-inducingdrugs,suchasphenytoin,carbamazepine,andphenobarbital,reducethelamotrigine’smeaneliminationhalf-lifetoabout12hoursanddecreaselamotrigineconcentrations(Hachad2002).Therearepharmacokineticinteractionsbetweenlamotrigineandanti-conceptivemedication.(Sidhu2005).Theclearanceoflevonogestrelisincreasedwithapossibledecreaseoftheanti-conceptivereliability.Ontheotherhandistheclearanceoflamotrigineenhancedbyanti-conceptivemedication,withaloweringoflamotrigineplasmalevels. Lamotriginedoesnotsignificantlyaffectthepharmacokineticsoflithium(Chen2000).

Lamotrigine and Mood Disorders

Acute treatment of bipolar depression TheobservationsofSmithandcolleagues(Smith1993a,1993b)thatpatientstreatedwithadd-onlamotrigineforpartialseizuresexperiencedimprovedmoodapartfromeffectsonepilepsystimulatedinvestigationsoflamotrigine’sefficacytotreatmooddisorders.Earlycasereportsinvolving

3131

2


bipolarpatientssuggestedthatlamotriginepossessedabroadspectrumoftherapeuticactivityinbipolardisorder,includingrapidcyclingandmixedstates(Weisler1994,Calabrese1996andWalden1996).Asubsequentopen-labelstudyprovidedpreliminarydatathatlamotriginewaseffectiveforpatientswithrefractorybipolardisorder,with68%ofdepressedpatientsand84%ofmanic/hypomanic/mixedpatientsshowingmoderatetomarkedresponse(Calabrese1999a). Anopennaturalisticstudyoftwenty-twodepressedbipolarpatientswhowererefractorytotreatmentwithacombinationofdivalproexsodiumandanothermoodstabilizerordivalproexsodiumandanantidepressantfor6weeksweretreatedwithadd-onlamotrigine.Sixteenoutof22(72%)respondedbytheendofweek4,suggestingthatlamotriginemaybeusefulinbipolardepression(Kusumakar1997).Inadouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithnonrapid-cyclingbipolarIdepression,treatmentwithlamotrigineover7weeks(50or200mg/day)didnotresultinasignificantdifferenceversusplaceboontheprimaryoutcomemeasure(HAM-D),butdidsoonseveralsecondaryoutcomemeasuresincludingtheMADRS,particularlyinthe200mggroup,comparedwithplacebo(Calabrese1999b).Improvementswereobservedasearlyasweek3. AfterthisfirstpositiveresultforlamotrigineinaRCT,lamotriginewastestedagainstplaceboinfourotherRCT’s(Calabrese2007andGoldsmith2003).NoneoftheseRCT’sdiscriminatedsignificantlybetweenlamotrigineandplaceboontheprimaryoutcomecriteria.Partofthisnegativeresultwasbecauseofahighplaceboresponseinallfourstudies.Nevertheless,ameta-analysisofallfivestudiesshowedasignificantalthoughmodestbenefitforlamotrigine.(Geddes2009) Thirty-onepatientswithrefractorybipolarandunipolarmooddisordersparticipatedinadouble-blind,randomized,crossoverstudyofthree6-weekmonotherapyevaluationsincludinglamotrigine,gabapentin,andplacebo.UsingtheClinicalGlobalImpressionsScaleforBipolarIllness(CGI-BP)astheprimaryoutcomevariable,thisstudyreporteda52%responserate(CGI-BPasmuchorverymuchimproved)forlamotrigine,comparedto26%forgabapentinand23%

32 Chapter 232

forplacebo-treatedpatients(Frye2000). Thefinalstudy(n=410)comparedlamotrigine(doseuptitratedto200mg/day)witholanzapine/fluoxetine(dose6/25,6/50,12/25or12/50mg/day)(Brown.2006)andshowedasmallbutsignificantadvantage(improvementontheMADRSafter7weeksof14.91vs12.92respectivelyp=0.002)fortheolanzapine/fluoxetinecombination.

Acute treatment of mania / mixed states The1999open-labelstudybyCalabreseandcolleaguesobservedarobustresponsetolamotrigine(primarilyasadd-ontherapy)in84%ofmanic/hypomanic/mixedpatients(Calabrese1999a).Inthefirstdouble-blind,randomized,controlledstudyoflamotrigineinacutemanialamotriginetitratedto100mg/dayoverthreeweekswasaseffectiveaslithium800mg/day(meanbloodlevel0.77mmol/L)inreducingmanicsymptoms(Ichim2000).However,lamotriginehasnotshownanti-manicactivityinplacebo-controlledstudies(Bowden2003).Unpublishedstudies(dataonfile,GlaxoSmithKline2003)inpatientswithacutemanicormixedexacerbationsofbipolarIdisorderhavefoundnosignificantdifferencefrombaselineinthe11-itemManiaRatingScale(MRS)betweenlamotrigineandplacebo(Goldsmith2003).

Maintenance therapy Theinitiallamotriginemaintenancestudywasadouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudyinrapidcyclingbipolardisorder(Calabrese2000).Openlabellamotrigineaddedtothetreatmentregimensof324patientsmeetingDSM-IVcriteriaforrapidcyclingbipolardisorderresultedin182stabilizedpatientswhowerethenrandomlyassignedtothedouble-blindmaintenancephaseafterbeingstratifiedforbipolarIorIIdisorder.Otherpsychotropicagentsweretaperedandpatientsrandomlyassignedtoeitherlamotriginemonotherapyorplaceboina1:1ratioforthesix-monthmaintenancephase.Overall49placebopatients(56%)and45lamotrigine-treatedpatients(50%)requiredtreatmentofanemergingmoodepisodewithadditionalpharmacotherapy.Althoughtherewasnostatisticalsignificancebetweenthesetwotreatmentgroupsontheprimary

3333

2


outcomemeasureoftimetoadditionalpharmacotherapy(medianof12weeksforplaceboversus18weeksforlamotrigine),lamotriginewassignificantlymoreeffectivethanplacebointhesurvivalinstudyanalysis(medianof8weeksforplaceboversus14weeksforlamotrigine).Inthesub-analysisaccordingtodiseasetype,lamotriginewassignificantlymoreeffectivethanplaceboindelayingtimetoadditionalpharmacotherapyforbipolarIIpatientsthanbipolarIpatients.Forty-sixpercentofbipolarIIpatientsonlamotriginemonotherapywerestablewithoutrelapseafter6monthscomparedtoonly18%ofplacebo-treatedbipolarIIpatients.(Calabrese2000).TheseresultswereconfirmedinaposthocanalysisofthesamepatientsamplewiththeLifechartmethod.Measuredwiththelifechartatleastonceweeklypatientstakinglamotriginewere1,8timesmorelikelytoachieveeuthymiathanthosetakingplacebo(Goldberg2008).Inanunpublishedstudy(dataonfile,GlaxoSmithKline2003),thesefindingswerenotreplicated.However,significantlyfewerlamotriginetreatedrapidcyclersrequiredinterventionforadepressiveepisode.Collectively,theseresultssuggestthatlamotriginemaybeausefultreatmentforrapidcyclingbipolarpatients,especiallyfortypeIIandforthepreventionofdepressiverelapses. Two18-monthmaintenancestudies(Bowden2003andCalabrese2003)comparinglamotrigine,lithium,andplaceboprovidedfurthersupportfortheuseoflamotrigineasamoodstabilizerandledtoitsapprovalbytheUSFDAinJune2003asamaintenancetreatmentforbipolarIdisorder.Thesecomplementarystudiesenrolledpatientsinadouble-blindphaseofmaintenancetherapyafterarecentdepressed,hypomanic,ormanicepisoderemitted(CGI-Sscoreof<3for4consecutiveweeks)duringopen-labelstabilizationduringwhichlamotriginewasinitiatedasadjunctiveormonotherapyandotherpsychotropicsdiscontinued.Inbothstudies,50%ofpatientsachievedstabilizationcriteriaallowingforprogressionintodouble-blindedmaintenancetherapywithlamotrigine(50-400mg/day),lithium(0.8-1.1mEq/L),orplacebo.Theprimaryefficacyendpointusedwastimetointerventionforanymoodepisode. Inbothofthesestudies,lamotrigineandlithiumdemonstratedeffectiveprophylaxisagainstanyemergingmoodepisodecomparedwithplacebo.Therewerestatisticallyfewerrelapsingmoodepisodesandlongermediansurvivalin

34 Chapter 234

lamotrigineandlithiumtreatedpatientscomparedwithplacebo.Mediansurvivalbeforeinterventionforanymoodepisodeforlamotrigine-treatedpatientsrangedfrom118-256days,significantlybetterthanplacebo(85-93days).Lithiumalsooutperformedplacebowithamediansurvivalof170-292days.However,therewereimportantdifferencesinthespectraofmaintenanceefficacy. Inbothstudies,lithium,butnotlamotriginewassuperiortoplaceboatdelayingthetimetointerventionforamanicorhypomanicepisode.Intotalforbothstudies123hypomanic/maniceventsemergedduringmaintenance,with25%ofplacebotreatedpatientsexperiencingahypomanic,manic,ormixedepisode(47of188);21%ofthelamotriginegrouprelapsed(58of273),butonly11%ofpatientsinthelithium-treatmentarmhadbreakthroughmaniaorhypomania(18of164).LithiumwasclearlymoreeffectivethanplaceboandlamotrigineinpreventingmanicandhypomanicrelapseinrecentlysymptomaticbipolarIpatients. Incontrast,lamotrigineappearstobemoreeffectivethanlithiuminthepreventionofdepressiverelapseinbipolarIpatients.Inbothstudies,lamotriginebutnotlithium,wassignificantlybetterthanplaceboatprolongingtimetointerventionforadepressivemoodepisode.Therewere209depressiverelapsesinthepatientsobservedinthetwostudies,withahigherrateofrelapseintheplacebo(68of188,or36%)andlithiumtreatmentgroups(56of164,or34%);lamotriginewasbetteratpreventingrecurrenceofdepressionwitha31%rateofdepressiverelapseandalongermediansurvivalbeforetreatmentofdepressionwasnecessary.Thedifferencewasparticularlyevidentinthetreatmentofrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientsinwhomonly14%ofthosereceivinglamotrigine(8of58)neededinterventionforemergentdepressioncomparedwith23%ofpatientsreceivinglithium(10of44)and30%receivingplacebo(21of69).Inaposthocanalysisofthefirst6monthsofthebipolarIpatients(indexepisodedepression)therewasnoevidenceforagreaterriskformooddestabilization(emergent(hypo)manicsymptoms)inthelamotriginegroupversustheplacebogroup(Goldberg2009).

3535

2


Safety

Rash Rashesrequiringhospitalizationanddiscontinuationoftreatmenthavebeenreportedwithlamotrigine.Thereportedrashrateis10%inadultpatientswithepilepsytreatedwithadjunctivelamotrigineand7%inbipolarIadultstreatedwithmonotherapy;theplaceborateis5%inbothpopulations(lamotriginepackageinsert).Seriousrashratesareconsiderablylowerat0.8%inpediatricepilepsypatients,0.3%inepilepticadultsasmonotherapyand0.13%asadjunctivetherapy.Aretrospectiveanalysisconductedofratesoflamotrigine-relatedrashin12multicenterstudiesoflamotrigineformooddisorders(n=1955),including1openstudy,7randomizedcontrolledacutetrials,and4randomizedcontrolledmaintenancetrialsfrom1996to2001reportedseriousrashin0%withlamotrigine,0.1%(n=1)withplacebo,and0%withcomparators(Calabrese2002).Acrossallbipolardisorderstudieswith2,272patientsonlamotrigine,seriousrashwasobservedinthreepatientsforanoverallrateof0.1%(lamotriginepackageinsert).OneofthesethreepatientsexperiencedamildStevens-Johnsonsyndromeonadjunctivelamotrigineanddidnotrequirehospitalization. InarandomizedtrialUsualCarePrecautionswerecomparedwithDermatologicPrecautions(UCPplusadditionalspecificprecautionsintendedtodecreasetheriskofrash)for12weeks(Ketter2006).Lamotriginewasadded(targetdose200mg/day)toongoingmedicationwithaslowuptitration.

UsualCareprecautionswere:1.notexceedingtheinitialdoseordose-escalationschedule2.ifarashdevelopedduringthestudythepatientcontactedtheinvestigator

immediately3.lamotriginewasstoppedincaseofrash.PatientsintheDermatologicPrecautionsgroupwere,besidesUCP,advisednotto:4.takenewmedicationsorfoods,usenewcosmetics,deodorants,detergentsor

36 Chapter 236

fabricsofteners5.stimulatetheimmunesystemthroughexcessivesunexposure6.participateinactivitiesthatmightleadtoexposuretopoisonoakorpoisonivy7.receiveanyimmunizations

1175patientswereincluded.Inbothgroupstherewerenoreportsofseriousrash.Therateofnon-seriousrashwaslowforUCPaswellasforDP(8.8%and8.6%respectively,OR0.99).whichiscomparablewithratesofrashinpreviousstudies.Clinicalresponsewas50%with29%remissionoverbothgroups(accordingtotheClinicalGlobalImpressionsBipolarversion). AGermanregistrythatdocumentstheincidencesofseriousrashhasbeeninplacesince1990andascertainshospitalizedcasesofStevens-Johnsonsyndrome(SJS)andtoxicepidermalnecrolysis(TEN)relatedtoantiepilepticdruguse(Rzany1996).Reportedcasesareconfirmedbyaregistryphysicianandreviewedbyadermatologicalexpertcommitteeensuringhighdiagnosticaccuracy.TheincidenceofseriousrashrisingtothelevelofSJS/TENdiagnosisintheGermanregistrywas0.02%from1993-2001(Messenheimer2002). Riskofrashisnotedtobehigherinpediatricpatientsandmaybeincreasedbyco-administrationofdivalproexsodiumorexceedingtherecommendedinitialdoseordoseescalationscheduleforlamotrigine.Womenmaybeatincreasedriskforrashcomparedwithmen,witharelativeriskof1.8(Wong1999).

Other side effects and tolerability Lamotrigineisknowntobegenerallywelltoleratedinthetreatmentofepilepsy(Choi2003).Agreatdealofdatageneratedbythe18-monthlamotriginemaintenancetrials(Bowden2003andCalabrese2003)confirmsclinicalexperienceandepilepsymanagementreportsoflamotrigine’sfavorablesideeffectprofileinthetreatmentofbipolarpatients.In280patientsonmaintenancelamotrigineduringdouble-blindedtreatmentinbothtrialscombined,only23(8.2%)discontinuedstudyparticipationprematurelyduetoanadverseevent;7.9%ofplacebotreatedpatientsexperiencedadverseeventsthatledto

3737

2


endofstudy(15of191).Overthe18monthsrandomizedphase,lamotriginetreatedpatientsexhibiteda4.9poundmeandecreaseinbodyweight,comparedtoa2.6poundmeanweightgainintheplacebogroup.Inacombinedanalysisofbothstudies,theincidenceofmania/hypomania/mixedepisodesreportedasadverseeventswas5%forpatientstreatedwithlamotrigine,4%forpatientstreatedwithlithium,and7%forpatientstreatedwithplacebo.Ingeneral,lamotrigineexhibitsplacebolevelratesoftreatment-emergentadverseeventsandisbettertoleratedthanlithium(Calabrese2003).Table1liststreatment-emergentadverseeventsforthecombinedmaintenancestudiesduringrandomizedphase.

Table 1. Adverseeventsobservedduringrandomizedphaseoflamotriginemaintenancestudies(inpercent)*

Event Lamotrigine(n=227) Placebo(n=190)

Nausea 14 11

Insomnia 10 6

Somnolence 9 7

Backpain 8 6

Fatigue 8 5

Rhinitis 7 4

Benignrash 7 5

Abdominalpain 6 3

Drymouth 6 4

Constipation 5 2

Vomiting 5 2

Coughexacerbation 5 3

Pharyngitis 5 4

*Adverseeventslistedhadincidence>5%andwerenumericallygreaterthanplacebo.[Bowden2003;Calabrese2003;Dataonfile,GlaxoSmithKline]

38 Chapter 238

Clinical applications for lamotrigine

Bipolar depression Forthemanagementofacutebipolardepression,theAPAPracticeGuidelinesof2002recommendedlamotrigineasafirst-lineoptionwithmoderateclinicalconfidence(Hirschfeld2002).Sincethenotheroptionshavebecomeavailable,especiallyquetiapineandthecombinationofolanzapineplusfluoxetine.Withthedatathatbecameavailableafterthe2002guideline,lamotriginehasaplaceinthetreatmentofacutebipolardepression,especiallyinpatientsexperiencingadepressiveepisodedespiteadequatetreatmentwithlithium.Inthesepatientslamotriginecanberecommendedasadd-ontherapywithsubstantialclinicalconfidence. Dosingshouldfollowpublishedtitrationschedulestominimizetheriskofrash,withaminimumdoseof50mg/dayandatargetdoseof200mg/dayformostpatients(table2).Thereisnopharmacokineticinteractionwithlithium,However,inbipolarpatientsexperiencingabreakthroughdepressiononcarbamazepineorvalproate,lamotrigineshouldbeaddedwhilekeepinginmindpharmacokineticinteractionsthatmayaffectdosing:doubledoseoflamotrigineincombinationwithcarbamazepine,halfthedoseincombinationwithvalproate.

Table 2. RecommendedLamotriginedosingschedule

Concomitant

medication?

Week

1&2

Week

3&4

Week5 Week6 Week7

Notondivalproexor

carbamazepine

25mgqd 50mgqd 100mg

qd

200mg

qd

200mg

qd

Ondivalproex 25mg

qod

25mgqd 50mgqd 100mg

qd

100mg

qd

Oncarbamazepine

orphenytoin

50mgqd 100mg

qd

200mg

qd

300mg

qd

300mg

qd

3939

2


Mania / mixed states LamotriginemonotherapyisnotrecommendedfortheacutemanagementofmaniaormixedstatesassociatedwithbipolarIdisorder.Despitelimitedcasereportsandearlydatasuggestingthatlamotriginemaypossessanti-manicproperties,furtherstudyhasledtotheconclusionthatlamotriginehasonlymildtomoderateefficacyinmaniaandshouldnotbereliablyusedasmonotherapyintheseurgentabovebaselinemooddisturbances.Theadditionoflamotriginetootherfirst-lineantimanicagents,suchaslithium,divalproex,olanzapine,orquetiapinemayhastenorcompleterecoveryfromacutemanicormixedstates.LamotrigineshoulddefinitelybeconsideredasaninitialadjunctivetreatmentforthesebipolarIpatientstoaddresstheneedtopreventfuturemoodepisodesafterrecoveryfromthecurrentmanicormixedepisode.Again,dosingguidelinesshouldbefollowedasindicatedpreviouslyandinthepackageinserttoavoidincreasedriskofrash. InbipolarIIpatientsexperiencingacutehypomania,lamotriginecanbeusedasamonotherapyorinconjunctionwithanothermoodstabilizersuchaslithium.Oneeffectivestrategyistheprescriptionoflamotrigineplusashort-termatypicalantipsychotic

Maintenance therapy LamotrigineisindicatedbytheUSFDAandtheEMEAforthemaintenancetreatmentofbipolarIdisordertodelaythetimetooccurrenceofmoodepisodes.Itshouldthereforebeconsideredinthetreatmentofallbipolarpatientsduetotheinherentnaturaltendencyfortheillnesstobechronicandrecurrent. Maintenancemonotherapywithlamotriginecanbeconsideredinthoseindividualswithnon-bipolarIillness,milderformsofbipolarIIdisorderwithpredominantdepressivecourse,andinotherbipolarspectrumdisorderssuchascyclothymicorhyperthymicpersonalities.Intheory,lamotriginemonotherapycouldalsobeconsideredasamaintenancetherapyaftersuccessfulECTforeitherunipolarorbipolardepression.Inmostpatients,lamotrigineshouldbepartofacombinedpharmacologicalstrategytopreventrelapse.Althoughlamotrigine

40 Chapter 240

hasbeendemonstratedaneffectivemaintenancetreatmentforbipolarIdisorder,itsabilitytopreventmanicepisodeswasconsiderablylessrobustthanitsantidepressantability.Acomprehensivebipolarmaintenancemedicationtreatmentplanmustaddresspreventionofdepressiveandmanicphases,andlamotrigineisonlymoderatelyeffectiveinthedelayofmanicepisodesnecessitatinguseofothermoodstabilizerswithacomplementaryefficacyprofile,suchaslithium,divalproex.oratypicalantipsychotics.

Use in women Therehavebeenreportsoflamotrigineserumconcentrationsdecreasinginwomenafterstartingoralcontraceptivesandincreasingafteroralcontraceptiveswerediscontinued(Sidhu2005).Dosageadjustmentsmayhavetobemadeinwomentakinglamotrigineduringtimesoforalcontraceptiveinitiationortermination,althoughnoknownlinkexistsbetweenbloodlevelsandtherapeuticeffectsforaffectivedisorders. LamotriginecarriesaCategoryCFDAwarningforuseduringpregnancy.Pregnantwomenmaintainedonlamotrigineduringpregnancyshouldhavebloodlevelsoflamotriginecheckedmonthlyasitsclearanceincreasessignificantlyaspregnancyprogresses.Apreconceptiondeterminationoflamotriginebloodlevelinastablebipolarwomanmayprovideatargetdoserangetomaintainduringpregnancy.Clearanceoflamotriginedropsquicklyafterdelivery,requiringdosagereductioninmostpostpartumpatients.Breast-feedingisnotrecommendedtonursingmothersonlamotriginesincesignificantlevelsoflamotriginearepresentinbreastmilkandlongtermeffectsofexposuretoneonatesisunknown.Althoughtherearesomereportsofanincreasedriskforisolatedcleftpalateorlipdeformityafterexposuretolamotriginemonotherapyduringthefirsttrimesterofpregnancy(Holmes2008)theoverallriskformajorbirthdefectsappeartobesimilartothatofthegeneralpopulation(Cunnington2005).

4141

2


Summary

Thediscoveryoflamotrigine’spositiveeffectsonmoodinepilepsypatientsledtoitsinvestigationsinandeventualapprovalfortreatingbipolarIdisorder.Althoughtheexactmoodstabilizingmechanismofactionforthisnovelanticonvulsantisunknown,itisthoughttoworkbyinhibitingvoltage-sensitivesodiumcurrents,inthismannerstabilizingneuronalmembranesandasaresultmodulatingthepresynaptictransmitterreleaseofexcitatoryaminoacidssuchasglutamate.Itisapprovedformaintenancetreatmentofbipolardisordertopreventdepressiveepisodes.Inaddition,itdeservesaplaceinthetreatmentofacutebipolardepression,withthestrongestevidenceasadd-ontreatmenttolithium(thisthesis).Lamotrigineiswelltolerated,themajorriskisasevererash,anditrequirescarefuldosemonitoring.

42 Chapter 242

References

Anderson,G.D.,Yau,M.K.,Gidal,B.E.,Harris,S.J.,Levy,R.H.,Lai,A.A.,Wolf,K.B.,Wargin,W.A.andDren,A.T.(1996),Bidirectionalinteractionofvalproateandlamotrigineinhealthysubjects,ClinPharmacolTher,60,145-56.

Bowden,C.L.(2003),Acuteandmaintenancetreatmentwithmoodstabilizers,IntJNeuropsychopharmacol,6,269-75.

Bowden,C.L.,Calabrese,J.R.,Sachs,G.,Yatham,L.N.,Asghar,S.A.,Hompland,M.,Montgomery,P.,Earl,N.,Smoot,T.M.andDeVeaugh-Geiss,J.(2003),Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientswithbipolarIdisorder,ArchGenPsychiatry,60,392-400.

BrownE.B.,McElroyS.L.,KeckP.E.,DeldarA.,AdamsD.H.,TohenM.andWilliamsonD.J.(2006),Olanzapine/FluoxetineCombinationVersusLamotrigineintheTreatmentofBipolarIDepression,J.ClinPsychiatry,67,1025-33

Calabrese,J.R.,Bowden,C.L.,McElroy,S.L.,Cookson,J.,Andersen,J.,Keck,P.E.,Jr.,Rhodes,L.,Bolden-Watson,C.,Zhou,J.andAscher,J.A.(1999),Spectrumofactivityoflamotrigineintreatment-refractorybipolardisorder,AmJPsychiatry,156,1019-23.

Calabrese,J.R.,Bowden,C.L.,Sachs,G.,Yatham,L.N.,Behnke,K.,Mehtonen,O.P.,Montgomery,P.,Ascher,J.,Paska,W.,Earl,N.andDeVeaugh-Geiss,J.(2003),Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlydepressedpatientswithbipolarIdisorder,JClinPsychiatry,64,1013-24.

Calabrese,J.R.,Bowden,C.L.,Sachs,G.S.,Ascher,J.A.,Monaghan,E.andRudd,G.D.(1999),Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup,JClinPsychiatry,60,79-88.

Calabrese,J.R.,Fatemi,S.H.andWoyshville,M.J.(1996),Antidepressanteffectsoflamotrigineinrapidcyclingbipolardisorder,AmJPsychiatry,153,1236.

Calabrese,J.R.,Hirschfeld,R.M.,Reed,M.,Davies,M.A.,Frye,M.A.,Keck,P.E.,Lewis,L.,McElroy,S.L.,McNulty,J.P.andWagner,K.D.(2003),ImpactofbipolardisorderonaU.S.communitysample,JClinPsychiatry,64,425-32.

Calabrese,J.R.;Huffman,R.F.;White,R.L.;Edwards,S.;Thompson,T.R.andAscher,J.A.(2007)AdditionalclinicaltrialdataandaretrospectivepooledanalysisofresponseratesacrossallrandomizedtrialsconductedbyGSK.,BipolarDisorders8(suppl.1),323-33.

4343

2


Calabrese,J.R.,Sullivan,J.R.,Bowden,C.L.,Suppes,T.,Goldberg,J.F.,Sachs,G.S.,Shelton,M.D.,Goodwin,F.K.,Frye,M.A.andKusumakar,V.(2002),Rashinmulticentertrialsoflamotrigineinmooddisorders:clinicalrelevanceandmanagement,JClinPsychiatry,63,1012-9.

Calabrese,J.R.,Suppes,T.,Bowden,C.L.,Sachs,G.S.,Swann,A.C.,McElroy,S.L.,Kusumakar,V.,Ascher,J.A.,Earl,N.L.,Greene,P.L.andMonaghan,E.T.(2000),Adouble-blind,placebo-controlled,prophylaxisstudyoflamotrigineinrapid-cyclingbipolardisorder.Lamictal614StudyGroup,JClinPsychiatry,61,841-50.

Calabrese,J.R.,Vieta,E.andShelton,M.D.(2003),Latestmaintenancedataonlamotrigineinbipolardisorder,EurNeuropsychopharmacol,13Suppl2,S57-66.

Chen,C.,Veronese,L.andYin,Y.(2000),Theeffectsoflamotrigineonthepharmacokineticsoflithium,BrJClinPharmacol,50,193-5.

Choi,H.andMorrell,M.J.(2003),Reviewoflamotrigineanditsclinicalapplicationsinepilepsy,ExpertOpinPharmacother,4,243-51.

Cohen,A.F.,Ashby,L.,Crowley,D.,Land,G.,Peck,A.W.andMiller,A.A.(1985),Lamotrigine(BW430C),apotentialanticonvulsant.Effectsonthecentralnervoussystemincomparisonwithphenytoinanddiazepam,BrJClinPharmacol,20,619-29.

Cohen,A.F.,Land,G.S.,Breimer,D.D.,Yuen,W.C.,Winton,C.andPeck,A.W.(1987),Lamotrigine,anewanticonvulsant:pharmacokineticsinnormalhumans,ClinPharmacolTher,42,535-41.

Cunnington,M,TennisP.andtheInternationalLamotriginePregnancyRegistryScientificAdvisoryCommittee(2005),Lamotrigineandtheriskofmalformationsinpregnancy,Neurology,64,955-60

Fitton,A.andGoa,K.L.(1995),Lamotrigine.Anupdateofitspharmacologyandtherapeuticuseinepilepsy,Drugs,50,691-713.

Frye,M.A.,Ketter,T.A.,Kimbrell,T.A.,Dunn,R.T.,Speer,A.M.,Osuch,E.A.,Luckenbaugh,D.A.,Cora-Ocatelli,G.,Leverich,G.S.andPost,R.M.(2000),Aplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotrigineandgabapentinmonotherapyinrefractorymooddisorders,JClinPsychopharmacol,20,607-14.

Garnett,W.R.(1997),Lamotrigine:pharmacokinetics,JChildNeurol,12Suppl1,S10-5.

Geddes,J.R.,Calabrese,J.R,Goodwin,G.M.(2009)Lamotriginefortreatmentofbipolardepression:independentmeta-analysisandmeta-regressionofindividualpatientdatafrom

44 Chapter 244

fiverandomisedtrials,Br.J.ofPsychiatry194,4-9

Gilman,J.T.(1995),Lamotrigine:anantiepilepticagentforthetreatmentofpartialseizures,AnnPharmacother,29,144-51.

Ginsberg,L.,Sachs,G.andKetter,T.(2003)InAmericanPsychiatricAssociation2003AnnualMeetingSanFrancisco,CA,pp.173-4.

Goa,K.L.Ross,S.R.andChrisp,P.(1993),Lamotrigine.Areviewofitspharmacologicalpropertiesandclinicalefficacyinepilepsy,Drugs,46,152-76.

Goldberg,J.F.,Bowden,C.L.,Calabrese,J.R.,Ketter,T.A.,Dann,R.S,FryeM.A.Suppes,TandPostR.M,(2008)Six-MonthProspectiveLifeChartingofMoodSymptomswithLamotrigineMonotherapyVersusPlaceboinRapidCyclingBipolarDisorder,BiologicalPsychiatry,63,125-30

Goldberg,J.F.,Calabrese,J.R.Saville,B.R.,Frye,M.A.Ketter,T.A.Suppes,T,Post,R.M.andF.K.Goodwin,(2009),MoodStabilizationandDestabilizationDuringAcuteandContinuationPhaseTreatmentforBipolarIDisorderWithLamotrigineorPlacebo,JClinPsychiatry70,1273–80

Goldsmith,D.R.,Wagstaff,A.J.,Ibbotson,T.andPerry,C.M.(2003),Lamotrigine:areviewofitsuseinbipolardisorder,Drugs,63,2029-50.

Hachad,H.,Ragueneau-Majlessi,I.andLevy,R.H.(2002),Newantiepilepticdrugs:reviewondruginteractions,TherDrugMonit,24,91-103.

Hirschfeld,R.M.,Calabrese,J.R.,Weissman,M.M.,Reed,M.,Davies,M.A.,Frye,M.A.,Keck,P.E.,Jr.,Lewis,L.,McElroy,S.L.,McNulty,J.P.andWagner,K.D.(2003),Screeningforbipolardisorderinthecommunity,JClinPsychiatry,64,53-9.

Holmes,L.B.,BaldwinE.J.,SmithC.R.,HabeckerE.,GlassmanL.,WongS.L.andWyszynskiD.F.(2008),Increasedfrequencyofisolatedcleftpalateininfantsexposedtolamotrigineduringpregnancy,Neurology,70,2152-58

Ichim,L.,Berk,M.andBrook,S.(2000),Lamotriginecomparedwithlithiuminmania:adouble-blindrandomizedcontrolledtrial,AnnClinPsychiatry,12,5-10.

Judd,L.L.,Akiskal,H.S.,Schettler,P.J.,Endicott,J.,Maser,J.,Solomon,D.A.,Leon,A.C.,Rice,J.A.andKeller,M.B.(2002),Thelong-termnaturalhistoryoftheweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIdisorder,ArchGenPsychiatry,59,530-7.

4545

2


Kupka,R.W.,Luckenbaugh,D.A,.Post,R.M,Suppes,T.,Altshuler,L.L.,Keck,P.E.,Jr,Frye,M.A.,Denicoff,K.D.,Grunze,H.,Leverich,G.S.,McElroy,S.L.,Walden,J.andNolen,W.A.(2005),Comparisonofrapid-cyclingandnon-rapid-cyclingbipolardisorderbasedonprospectivemoodratingsin539outpatients,Am.JPsychiatry,162,1273-80.

Ketter,T.A.,GreistJ.H.,Graham,J.A.,Roberts,J.N.,Thompson,T.R.andNanry,K.P.,(2006),TheeffectofDermatologicPrecautionsontheIncidenceofRashWithAdditionofLamotrigineintheTreatmentofBipolarIDisorder:ARandomizedTrial,JClin.Psychiatry67,400-6

Kusumakar,V.andYatham,L.N.(1997),Anopenstudyoflamotrigineinrefractorybipolardepression,PsychiatryRes,72,145-8.

Leach,M.J.,Baxter,M.G.andCritchley,M.A.(1991),Neurochemicalandbehavioralaspectsoflamotrigine,Epilepsia,32Suppl2,S4-8.

Leach,M.J.,Marden,C.M.andMiller,A.A.(1986),Pharmacologicalstudiesonlamotrigine,anovelpotentialantiepilepticdrug:II.Neurochemicalstudiesonthemechanismofaction,Epilepsia,27,490-7.

Li,X.,Ketter,T.A.andFrye,M.A.(2002),Synaptic,intracellular,andneuroprotectivemechanismsofanticonvulsants:aretheyrelevantforthetreatmentandcourseofbipolardisorders?,JAffectDisord,69,1-14.

Matsuo,F.,Bergen,D.,Faught,E.,Messenheimer,J.A.,Dren,A.T.,Rudd,G.D.andLineberry,C.G.(1993),Placebo-controlledstudyoftheefficacyandsafetyoflamotrigineinpatientswithpartialseizures.U.S.LamotrigineProtocol0.5ClinicalTrialGroup,Neurology,43,2284-91.

Messenheimer,J.A.(2002)InAmericanAcademyofNeurologyAnnualMeetingDenver,CO.

Mikati,M.A.,Schachter,S.C.,Schomer,D.L.,Keally,M.,Osborne-Shafer,P.,Seaman,C.A.,Sheridan,P.H.,Ashworth,M.,Kupferberg,H.,Valakas,A.and(1989),Long-termtolerability,pharmacokineticandpreliminaryefficacystudyoflamotrigineinpatientswithresistantpartialseizures,ClinNeuropharmacol,12,312-21.

Ohman,I.,Vitols,S.andTomson,T.(2000),Lamotrigineinpregnancy:pharmacokineticsduringdelivery,intheneonate,andduringlactation,Epilepsia,41,709-13.

Pennell,P.B.(2003),Antiepilepticdrugpharmacokineticsduringpregnancyandlactation,Neurology,61,S35-42.

46 Chapter 246

Post,R.M.,Denicoff,K.D.,Leverich,G.S.andal.,e.(2002),Presentationsofdepressioninbipolarillness,ClinNeurosciRes,2,142-157.

Rambeck,B.andWolf,P.(1993),Lamotrigineclinicalpharmacokinetics,ClinPharmacokinet,25,433-43.

Ramsay,R.E.,Pellock,J.M.,Garnett,W.R.,Sanchez,R.M.,Valakas,A.M.,Wargin,W.A.,Lai,A.A.,Hubbell,J.,Chern,W.H.,Allsup,T.and(1991),Pharmacokineticsandsafetyoflamotrigine(Lamictal)inpatientswithepilepsy,EpilepsyRes,10,191-200.

Regeer,E.J.,ten,HaveM.,Rosso,M.L.,Hakkaart-van,RoijenL.,Vollebergh,W.andNolenW.A.(2004),Prevalenceofbipolardisorderinthegeneralpopulation:aReappraisalStudyoftheNetherlandsMentalHealthSurveyandIncidenceStudy.ActaPsychiatr.Scand.110,5374-82.

RzanyB.,Mockenhaupt,M.,Baur,S.,Schroder,W.,Stocker,U.,Mueller,J.,Hollander,N.,Bruppacher,R.andSchopf,E.(1996),Epidemiologyoferythemaexsudativummultiformemajus,Stevens-JohnsonsyndromeandtoxicepidermalnecrolysisinGermany(1990-1992):structureandresultsofapopulation-basedregistry,JClinEpidemiol,49,769-73.

Shiah,I.S.,Yatham,L.N.,Lam,R.W.andZis,A.P.(1998),Effectsoflamotrigineonthe5-HT1Areceptorfunctioninhealthyhumanmales,JAffectDisord,49,157-62.

SidhuJ.,JobS.,SinghS.andPhilipsonR.,Thepharmacokineticandpharmacodynamicconsequencesoftheco-administrationoflamotrigineandacombinedoralcontraceptiveinhealthyfemalesubjects.Br.J.ofClin.Pharmacol.61,191-99

Smith,D.,Baker,G.,Davies,G.,Dewey,M.andChadwick,D.W.(1993),Outcomesofadd-ontreatmentwithlamotrigineinpartialepilepsy,Epilepsia,34,312-22.

Smith,D.,Chadwick,D.,Baker,G.,Davis,G.andDewey,M.(1993),Seizureseverityandthequalityoflife,Epilepsia,34Suppl5,S31-5.

Tran,T.A.,Leppik,I.E.,Blesi,K.,Sathanandan,S.T.andRemmel,R.(2002),Lamotrigineclearanceduringpregnancy,Neurology,59,251-5.

Vinod,K.Y.andSubhash,M.N.(2002),Lamotrigineinducedselectivechangesin5-HT(1A)receptormediatedresponseinratbrain,NeurochemInt,40,315-9.

Walden,J.,Hesslinger,B.,vanCalker,D.andBerger,M.(1996),Additionoflamotriginetovalproatemayenhanceefficacyinthetreatmentofbipolaraffectivedisorder,Pharmacopsychiatry,29,193-5.

4747

2


Weisler,R.,Risner,M.,Ascher,J.andHouser,T.(1994)InAmericanPsychiatricAssociation1994AnnualMeetingPhiladelphia,PA.

Weissman,M.M.,Bland,R.C.,Canino,G.J.,Faravelli,C.,Greenwald,S.,Hwu,H.G.,Joyce,P.R.,Karam,E.G.,Lee,C.K.,Lellouch,J.,Lepine,J.P.,Newman,S.C.,Rubio-Stipec,M.,Wells,J.E.,Wickramaratne,P.J.,Wittchen,H.andYeh,E.K.(1996),Cross-nationalepidemiologyofmajordepressionandbipolardisorder,Jama,276,293-9.

Wong,I.C.,Mawer,G.E.andSander,J.W.(1999),Factorsinfluencingtheincidenceoflamotrigine-relatedskinrash,AnnPharmacother,33,1037-42.

Xie,X.andHagan,R.M.(1998),Cellularandmolecularactionsoflamotrigine:Possiblemechanismsofefficacyinbipolardisorder,Neuropsychobiology,38,119-30.

Xie,X.,Lancaster,B.,Peakman,T.andGarthwaite,J.(1995),InteractionoftheantiepilepticdruglamotriginewithrecombinantratbraintypeIIANa+channelsandwithnativeNa+channelsinrathippocampalneurones,PflugersArch,430,437-46.

Yuen,A.W.,Land,G.,Weatherley,B.C.andPeck,A.W.(1992),Sodiumvalproateacutelyinhibitslamotriginemetabolism,BrJClinPharmacol,33,511-3.

MarcL.M.vanderLoos,M.D.;PaulG.H.Mulder,Ph.D.;ErwinG.Th.M.Hartong,M.D.,Ph.D.;MarcB.J.Blom,M.D.;AntonC.Vergouwen,M.D.,Ph.D.;HermanJ.U.E.M.deKeyzer,M.D.;PeterJ.H.Notten,M.D.;MarijkeL.Luteijn,M.D.;ManuelaA.Timmermans,M.Sc.;EduardVieta,M.D.,Ph.D.;andWillemA.Nolen,M.D.,Ph.D.,fortheLamLitStudyGroup

FromtheDepartmentofPsychiatry,IsalaKlinieken,locationSophia,Zwolle(Dr.vanderLoos);theDepartmentofEpidemiology&Biostatistics,ErasmusUniversityMedicalCenter,Rotterdam(Dr.Mulder);theDepartmentofPsychiatry,Canisius-WilhelminaHospital,Nijmegen(Dr.Hartong);ParnassiaPsychiatricInstitute,TheHague(Dr.Blom);theDepartmentofPsychiatry,St.LucasAndreasHospital,Amsterdam(Dr.Vergouwen);GroupPractice:BiologicalPsychiatryandPsychotherapy,Retranchement(Dr.deKeyzer);theDepartmentofPsychiatry,St.ElisabethHospital,Tilburg(Dr.Notten);theDepartmentofPsychiatry,AlbertSchweitzerHospital,Dordrecht(Dr.Luteijn);ClinicalOperations,GlaxoSmithKline,Zeist(Ms.Timmermans);BipolarDisordersProgram,DepartmentofPsychiatry,UniversityMedicalCenterGroningen,UniversityofGroningen(Dr.Nolen),theNetherlands;andInstituteofNeuroscience,HospitalClinic,UniversityofBarcelona,IDIBAPS,CIBER-SAM,Catalonia,Spain(Dr.Vieta).

The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 2009; 70: 223-231

Efficacy and safety of lamotrigine as add-on treatment to lithium in bipolar depression: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

3

50 Chapter 350

Abstract

Objective:Lamotrigineisoneofthepharmacologicoptionsforthetreatmentofbipolardepressionbuthasonlybeenstudiedasmonotherapy.Thisstudycomparedtheacuteeffectsoflamotrigineandplaceboasadd-ontherapytoongoingtreatmentwithlithiuminpatientswithbipolardepression. Method:Outpatients(n=124)aged18yearsandolderwithaDSM-IVbipolarIorIIdisorderandamajordepressiveepisode(Montgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale[MADRS]score≥18andClinicalGlobalImpressions-BipolarVersion[CGI-BP]severityofdepressionscore≥4)whilereceivinglithiumtreatment(0.6–1.2mmol/L)wererandomlyassignedto8weeksofdouble-blindtreatmentwithlamotrigine(titratedto200mg/d)orplacebo.TheprimaryoutcomemeasurewasmeanchangefrombaselineintotalscoreontheMADRSatweek8.Secondaryoutcomemeasureswereresponse(definedasareductionof≥50%ontheMADRSand/orchangeofdepressionscoreontheCGI-BPof“muchimproved”or“verymuchimproved”comparedtobaseline)andswitchtomaniaorhypomania(definedasaCGI-BPseverityofmaniascoreofatleastmildlyillatanyvisit).PatientswereincludedinthestudybetweenAugust2002(SpainstartedinOctober2003)andMay2005. Results:EndpointmeanchangefrombaselineMADRStotalscorewas–15.38(SE=1.32)pointsforlamotrigineand–11.03(SE=1.36)pointsforplacebo(t=–2.29,df=104,p=.024).SignificantlymorepatientsrespondedtolamotriginethantoplaceboontheMADRS(51.6%vs.31.7%,p=.030),butnotontheCGI-BPchangeofdepression(64.1%vs.49.2%,p=.105).Switchtomaniaorhypomaniaoccurredin5patients(7.8%)receivinglamotrigineand2patients3.3%)receivingplacebo(p=.441). Conclusion:Lamotriginewasfoundeffectiveandsafeasadd-ontreatmenttolithiumintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression.

51

3

Efficacy and safety of lamotrigine as add-on treatment to lithium in bipolar depression: a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial 51

Introduction

Patientswithbipolardisorderspendmoretimedepressedthanmanicorhypomanic(1–4),whilemostmoodstabilizers(lithium,valproate,carbamazepine)aremoreeffectiveagainstmanicepisodesthandepressiveepisodes(5–7).Thesameappearstrueforatypicalantipsychotics,althougholanzapine(aloneaswellasincombinationwithfluoxetine(8))andquetiapine(9)havedemonstratedefficacyintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression. Asaconsequence,manybipolarpatientsalsoreceiveantidepressants,mostlyincombinationwithothertherapies.Thefindingthattheeffectsizeforthecombinationofolanzapinewithfluoxetinewassuperiortotheeffectsizeofolanzapinemonotherapyunderscorestheimportanceofcombinationtherapystudies(10).Whilesomestudiesfoundthatantidepressants,eitherasmonotherapyorcombinationtherapywithmoodstabilizers,areeffectiveinthetreatmentofacutebipolardepression(11),otherstudiesfoundnoeffectoftheadditionofantidepressantstomoodstabilizers(12,13).Inaddition,theirusemaybeassociatedwiththeriskofswitchtomaniaorhypomania(11,14) Theanticonvulsantlamotrigineprovidesanadditionaltreatmentoption.Afterafewcasereportsandsomeopenlabelstudies(15–17),thefirstdouble-blindrandomizedcontrolledtrial(18)ontheefficacyoflamotriginemonotherapyintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepressionfounditmoreeffectivethanplaceboatdosesof50and200mg/dayonseveralsecondaryoutcomemeasures,includingtheMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS),butnotontheprimaryoutcomemeasure,i.e.,theHamiltonRatingScaleforDepression(HAM-D).Subsequently,itsefficacyintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepressionwasstudiedin4otherrandomizedcontrolledtrials.Althoughthosestudieswereallnegativeontheprimaryoutcomecriterion(19),ameta-analysisofthe5studiesshowedasmallbutsignificantpositiveresult(20,21).Inanotherstudy,lamotriginewasslightlylesseffectivebutbettertoleratedthanacombinationofolanzapineandfluoxetine(22).Collaborativeresultswerealsoobtainedfromacrossoverstudythatcomparedlamotrigineandgabapentintoplacebo(23).In2long-termstudiesofbipolarIpatientswithacurrent(orrecent)manicor

52 Chapter 352

depressiveepisode(24,25),lamotrigine(titratedupto200–400mg/day)wasaddedtoongoingtreatmentwithotherpsychotropicdrugsover8to16weeks.Concomitantdrugsweregraduallywithdrawn,afterwhichstabilizedpatientswererandomlyassignedtocontinuationoflamotrigineortolithiumorplacebo(eachasmonotherapy)forupto18months.Inbothstudies,lamotrigineandlithiumwerestatisticallymoreeffectivethanplaceboontheprimaryoutcomemeasure(timefromrandomizationtointerventionforanymoodepisode),butlithiumwaspredominantlyeffectiveagainstmanicepisodesandlamotriginepredominantlyagainstdepressiveepisodes,suggestingthatlithiumandlamotriginehavedifferentialandpotentiallycomplementaryeffects. Inthisarticle,wereporttheresultsofthefirstplacebocontrolledstudyaddressingtheefficacyandsafetyoflamotrigineasadd-ontolithiumintheacutetreatmentofpatientswithbipolardepression.

Method

Study Design Thisstudyisthefirstphaseofaninvestigator-initiated(W.A.N.)randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlledtrial,with23recruitingcenters(of25selected)intheNetherlandsand3recruitingcenters(of5selected)inSpain. RecruitmenttookplacebetweenAugust2002andMay2005(SpainstartedinOctober2003).ThestudywasapprovedbytheethicalreviewboardoftheUniversityMedicalCenterUtrecht,theNetherlands,andbylocalinstitutionalreviewboardsinbothcountries.Allpatientsgavewritteninformedconsentpriortoinitiationofanystudyprocedure.

Patients Outpatients(menorwomen)aged18yearsoroldercouldbeincludediftheymetcriteriaforDSM-IVbipolarIorIIdisorder,currentmajordepressiveepisodeconfirmedbytheMini-InternationalNeuropsychiatricInterviewPlus(MINI-Plus)(26)withascoreof≥18pointsontheMADRS(27)andascoreof≥4(moderatelyill)ontheClinicalGlobalImpressions-BipolarVersion(CGI-BP)

53

3


severityofdepressionrating(28).Allpatientshadtobereceivingtreatmentwithlithiumwithastabledose(plasmalevel,0.6–1.2mmol/L)duringatleast2weekspriortothestudy. Exclusioncriteriawerethefollowing:thepresenceofpsychoticfeatures,asevererapidcyclingcoursewith≥10episodesoverthelast12months(rapidcyclingwith4–9episodesintheprevious12monthswasallowed),severesuicidality(scoreof≥5onitem10oftheMADRS),ahistoryofalcoholorsubstanceabusewithin1monthordependencewithin12monthsofenrollment,aseverepersonalitydisordersuggestingnoncompliance,orasevereneurologicorothersomaticillnessandtheuseofsomaticmedicationthatcouldaffectmood.Womenofchild-bearingpotentialwereonlyeligibleforthestudyiftheyhadanegativepregnancytestatscreeningandagreedtoutilizeaneffectivecontraceptivemethod.Exceptforlithium,patientswerenotallowedtohaveusedanantipsychoticoranantidepressantwithin2weeks(fluoxetine,4weeks)ofrandomization.Benzodiazepineswereallowedatamaximumof2-mglorazepamequivalentsperdaythroughoutthestudy,i.e.,forstandingaswellasrescuemedication,foranxiety,agitation,orsleepproblems.

Treatments Afterinclusioninthestudy,patientswererandomlyassigned1:1toeitherlamotrigineorplaceboinblocksof2asadjunctivetreatmenttoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumaccordingtoarandomizationlist.Stratificationwasdonebysite.Thecodeofeachpatientwaskeptinasealedenvelopeatthepharmacyofeachparticipatingcenterandcouldbeopenedbythepharmacistonlyincaseofmedicalemergency.Thestudyblindwaspreserveduntilafterthelastpatientevaluation. Studymedicationwasadministeredoncedailyinthemorning.Lamotriginewasstartedat25mg/dayinweeks1and2andwasincreasedto50mg/dayinweeks3and4,to100mg/dayinweeks5and6,and,finally,to200mg/dayinweeks7and8.Placebowasadministeredbyutilizingtabletsidenticalinappearanceandnumber.Thelithiumdosageremainedstableduringthestudywithmonitoringofplasmalevels(tobekeptat0.6–1.0mmol/L)at

54 Chapter 354

baselineandweek8. Toestablishmedicationcompliance,apillcountwasdoneateveryvisit.Patientsreturningmorethan30%oftheirprescribedmedicationorreportinganinterruptionofmedicationformorethan3dayswerewithdrawnfromthestudy.Patientswhomissedtheirstudymedicationfor1,2,or(maximum)3daysrestartedatthesamedose.

Outcome Measures Atbaseline,diagnosiswasconfirmedwiththeMINI-Plussectionsdepressiveepisode,manicepisode,hypomanicepisode,alcoholabuseanddependence,andsubstanceabuseanddependence.Inaddition,clinicianscompletedtheClinicalQuestionnaireforBipolarIllness(CQBP-C),withitemsonillnessandtreatmenthistory,asusedbytheformerStanleyFoundationBipolarNetwork(29).Severityofsymptomswasassessedatbaselineandatweeks2,4,6,and8byusingtheMADRSandtheCGI-BPseverityofdepressionandseverityofmania.Adverseeventswereassessedateachvisitbyinquiringaboutanyunpleasantfeelingsincethelastvisitand,ifpresent,ratedmild,moderate,orsevere. TheprotocolaswellasthecaserecordformwerewritteninEnglishbutincludedvalidatedDutchandSpanishtranslationsoftheMADRSandtheCGI-BP.IntheNetherlands,therewere4researchmeetings,includingMADRStrainingsessions;27ratersscoredatleast4patientswithanintraclasscoefficient=0.95.AfterreceivinganinitialMADRStraininginSpain,allSpanishresearchersparticipatedinaresearchmeetingintheNetherlandswithadditionalMADRStraining. TheprimaryoutcomemeasurewasthemeanchangefrombaselineintotalMADRSscoreatweek8.Secondaryoutcomemeasureswereresponse(definedasareductionof≥50%ontheMADRSand/orCGI-BPchangeofdepressionscoreof“muchimproved”or“verymuchimproved”comparedtobaseline)andswitchintomaniaorhypomania(definedasaCGI-BPseverityofmaniascoreofatleastmildlyillatanyvisit).Posthoc,wealsoanalyzedon

55

3


whichitemsoftheMADRSthereweresignificantdifferencesbetweenlamotrigineandplaceboatweek8. Switchtomaniaorhypomaniaisanundesirableoutcomeinthetreatmentofbipolardepressionbutcanoccurfollowingrecoveryfromdepression.However,itoftenremainsunclearinpublicationswhetherpatientswhoswitchedwerealsocountedasresponders.Therefore,inaposthocanalysis,weassessedwhetherpatientsreachedthecriteriaforbothresponse(MADRSand/orCGI-BPchangeofdepression)andnoswitchtomaniaorhypomania(CGI-BP),whichistheultimategoalinthetreatmentofbipolardepression. Thestudywasinitiallyaimedatcomparing2groupsof110patientsinordertodetectameandifferenceof4pointsinMADRSscoresbetweenthe2groups,with80%powerandαof.05(2-sided).Thestandarddeviation(SD)oftheMADRSscorewasinitiallysetat11points.Becauseofdifficultiesinrecruitingtheplannednumberofpatients,thesamplesizewasrecalculatedafterinclusionofatotalof43patients.TheMADRSscoresbasedontheseactuallyobservedpatients,whowereevaluatedblindlytooutcome,resultedinanSDof8pointsandacorrespondingrecalculatedsamplesizeof60patientspergroup.

Analysis Mixed-modelanalysisofvariance(ANOVA)forrepeatedmeasureswasprospectivelychosenasmethodofanalysisforMADRSscores.Theindependentvariablesinthisanalysisweretimeandtreatmentandtheirinteraction.TimeascategoricalvariableallowedestimatingandtestingmeandifferencesinMADRSscorebetweenthe2treatmentsatanyvisit,includingtheprimaryefficacymeasure:scorechangefrombaselineatweek8.ForthispurposetherelevantcontrastswerespecifiedinthemodelforwhichtheANOVAproducedtheestimates,SEs,confidenceintervals(CIs),andappropriatettestspervisit.Inordertomakeinferenceaboutanoveralltreatmenteffectoverallvisits,timewasconsideredanumerictrendvariableinthemodel.ThisallowedestimatingandtestingadownwardtrendintimeofthemeanMADRSscoreineithertreatment

56 Chapter 356

groupandthedifferenceintimetrendbetweenthe2treatmentsasasingleefficacymeasure,forwhichthemixed-modelANOVAproducedtheestimateSE,CI,andappropriatettest.Inaccordancewiththeintent-to-treatprinciple,allrandomlyassignedsubjectscontributedtotheseanalyses,missingvaluesofMADRSbeingproperlyadjustedforbytherestrictedmaximumlikelihoodestimationprocedureusedinthemixed-modelANOVAs.ClinicalGlobalImpression-BipolarVersionseverityscoresweresimilarlyanalyzedbyusingmixed-modelANOVA,withtimeascategoricalvariable.Dichotomousoutcomescores(response,switch,orpresenceofadverseeffects)weremadecompletebyusingthelast-observation-carried-forwardmethodandthenwereanalyzedbycomparingpercentagesbetweenthe2treatmentgroupsusingFisherexacttest.Differencesinthedistributionofcategoricalnominalvariablesbetweenthe2treatmentgroupsweretestedusingFisherexacttest;forcategoricalordinalvariablestheexactχ2trendtestwasused.Foreachtest,a2-sidedpvaluebelow.05wasconsideredtodenotestatisticalsignificance.

Results

Patients and Illness Characteristics Intotal,128patientswererecruited(fig1):mostpatients(n=82)fromthe23centersintheNetherlands,34patientsviaadvertisementsinDutchnewspapers,and12patientsfromthe3centersinSpain.Therangeofincludedpatientspercenterwasbetween1and25. Fourpatientswerenotincludedintheanalysis:atbaseline,1patientappearedtouseanantipsychotic;1patienthadusedanantidepressantinthe2weeksbeforerandomization;1patienthadhypothyroidism;and1patientnevertookanymedication.Thus,124patientswererandomlyassignedandincludedintheanalysis:64patientstolithiumpluslamotrigineand60patientstolithiumplusplacebo.Therewerenostatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenthe2groupsinpatientcharacteristicsandillnessseverityatbaseline(table1).

57

3


Figure 1. Flowchartofpatientsrandomlyassignedtolamotrogineorplaceboasadd-ontreatmenttolithium

AssessedforEligibility(n=128)

Randomlyassigned(n=124)

Lamotrigine(n=64)

LosttoFollow-Up (n=0)Discontinued (n=12)

Completed (n=52)Analyzed (n=64)

LackofEfficacy (n=2)AdverseEffects (n=4)WithdrawnConsent(n=1)ProtocolViolation (n=2)Noncompliance (n=1)Other (n=2)

LackofEfficacy (n=3)AdverseEffects (n=2)WithdrawnConsent(n=1)ProtocolViolation (n=0)Noncompliance (n=1)Other (n=2)

LosttoFollow-Up (n=1)Discontinued (n=9)

Completed (n=50)Analyzed (n=60)

Placebo(n=60)

Excluded(n=4)NotmeetinginclusionCriteria(n=3)NotTakingStudyMedication (n=1)

58 Chapter 358

Table 1. Baselinepatientandillnesscharacteristicsinpatientsrandomlyassignedtolamotrogineorplaceboasadd-ontreatmenttolithium

CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressions-BipolarVersion,MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDespressionRatingScale,MAOI=monoamineoxidaseinhibitor,SSRI=selectiveserotoninreuptakeinhibitor,SNRI=serotonin-norepinephrinereuptakeinhibitor,TCA=tricyclicantidepressant.

Lamotriginen=64

Placebon=60

Totaln=124 Statistic Value df P

Femalegender(n,%) 37 57.8 30 50 67 54.0 Fisher’s - - 0.471Age(years)(mean,SD) 45.2 12.1 47.6 11.6 46.4 11.9 t-test 1.13 122 0.261IlnesscharacteristicsBipolarIdisorder(n,%) 43 67.2 41 68.3 84 67.7 Fisher’s - - 1.000Rapidcyclingcourse–last12months(n,%)

12 18.8 4 6.7 16 12.9 Fisher’s - - 0.061

MADRS(mean,SD) 28.25 5.97 28.82 6.24 28.52 6.08 t-test 0.52 122 0.606CGI-BPdepressionseverity(mean,SD)

4.56 0.64 4.53 0.57 4.55 0.60 ChiSq.trend

0.07 1 0.882

CGI-BPmaniaseverity(mean,SD)

1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 Fisher’s - - 1.000

PrevioustreatmentsforindexdepressiveepisodeLithiumBaselineplasmalevel(mEq)(mean,SD)

0.82 0.16 0.84 0.16 0.83 0.16 t-test 0.48 122 0.634

Durationoftreatmentbeforerandomisation2to4weeks(n,%) 1 1.9 4 8.0 - - Fisher’s - - N.S.1-3months(n,%) 6 11.3 4 8.0 - - Fisher’s - - N.S≥3months(n,%) 46 86.8 42 84.0 - - Fisher’s - - N.S.Unknown/missing(n,%) 11 10

TCA(n,%) 6 9.4 4 6.7 10 8.1 Fisher’s - - 0.745SSRI/SNRI(n,%) 15 23,4 16 26.7 31 25.0 Fisher’s - - 0.836MAO-inhibitor(n,%) 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.353Antipsychotic,typical(n,%)

4 6.3 3 5.0 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Antipsychotic,atypical(n,%)

15 23.4 11 18.3 26 21.0 Fisher’s - - 0.317

Valproicacid(n,%) 5 7.8 2 3.3 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.247Carbamazepine(n,%) 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.285Benzodiazepine(n,%) 44 68.8 35 58.3 79 63.7 Fisher’s - - 0.154Other(n,%) 3 4.7 4 6.7 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.464

59

3


Inbothgroups,morethan80%ofthepatientshadbeenreceivinglithiummaintenancetreatmentforatleast3months. Atbaseline,lithiumplasmalevelswerewithinthepredefinedrangefor119patients(0.6–1.2mmol/L),while5patientshadmarginallylowerplasmalevels(allabove0.53mmol/L).Astheselevelswereonlymarginallylowerthantherequiredlevelof0.6mmol/L,adecisiontoincludethesepatientsintheanalysiswasmadepriortobreakingofthetreatmentblind.Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenlithiumplasmalevelsintheplacebogroupversusthelamotriginegroupatbaseline(t=0.48,df=122,p=.63;0.84[SD=0.16]mmol/Land0.82[SD=0.16]mmol/L,respectively)norat8weeks(t=1.36,df=100,p=.18;0.80[SD=0.14]mmol/Land0.76[SD=0.16]mmol/L,respectively). Inthelamotriginegroup,52patients(81%)completedthe8-weekstudyperiodversus50patients(83%)intheplacebogroup.Ofthe12patientswhodiscontinuedthetrialinthelamotriginegroup,2discontinuedbecauseoflackofefficacyand4becauseofadverseeffects.Intheplacebogroup,10patientsdiscontinuedthetrial:3becauseoflackofefficacyand2becauseofadverseeffects.Otherreasonsinbothgroupsfordiscontinuingwerewithdrawnconsent,protocolviolation,noncompliance,andlosttofollow-up.

Efficacy ResultsarepresentedinTables2and3.Ontheprimaryoutcomemeasure,changeintheMADRSscorefrombaselinetoweek8,lamotriginewassignificantlymoreeffectivethanplacebo(decreaseof15.38vs.11.03,respectively,p=.024)(table2).ThelamotriginegroupalsohadsignificantlylowerMADRSscoresatweeks6and8comparedtotheplacebogroup(Figure2).Startingfromanoverallaveragebaselinelevelof28.4points,theMADRSscoredecreasedonaverageby3.77pointsper2weeks(95%CI=3.15to4.38;p<.0005)duringthefirst8weeksoftreatmentinthelamotriginegroup.Intheplacebogroup,thedecrementwasonaverage2.59pointsper2weeks(95%CI=1.96to3.22;p<.0005).Hence,themeanMADRSscoreinthelamotriginegroupbecameincreasinglylowerthanthemeanscoreintheplacebo

60 Chapter 360

groupby,onaverage,1.17pointsper2weeks(95%CI=0.33to2.02;p=.007)duringthefirst8weeksoftreatment.Response,definedasareductionoftheMADRSscoreof≥50%,wasstatisticallygreater(p=.03)inthelamotriginegroup(51.6%)thanintheplacebogroup(31.7%)(table3).ResponseaccordingtoCGI-BPchangeofdepressionscores≤2andresponseaccordingtoeithercriterion(MADRSand/orCGI-BPchangeofdepression)showednosignificantdifferences.

Table 2.EfficacyResults(mixedmodelestimates):severityscales

CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressions-BipolarVersion,MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale.Boldvaluesindicatesignificantlevels<0.05

Lamotrigine(n=64)

Placebo(n=60) Difference

tTest df PMeasure Mean SE Mean SE Mean SEMADRSscorechangefrombaseline(primaryoutcomemeasure)Week2 -5.30 0.87 -3.74 0.91 -1.56 1.26 -1.23 121 .220Week4 -9.22 1.25 -6.24 1.29 -2.98 1.80 -1.66 110 .101Week6 -12.84 1.35 -9.31 1.39 -3.53 1.90 -1.82 104 .071Week8 -15.38 1.32 -11.03 1.36 -4.35 1.90 -2.29 104 .024

MADRSscoreateachvisitBaseline 28.25 0.76 28.82 0.79 -0.57 1.10 -0.52 122 .606Week2 22.95 1.02 25.08 1.06 -2.12 1.47 -1.44 121 .153Week4 19.03 1.28 22.58 1.32 -3.55 1.84 -1.93 113 .056Week6 15.41 1.30 19.50 1.34 -4.09 1.87 -2.19 106 .031Week8 12.87 1.23 17.79 1.27 -4.92 1.77 -2.78 104 .006

CGI-BPseverityofdepressionscoreateachvisitBaseline 4.56 0.08 4.53 0.08 0.03 0.11 0.27 122 0.789Week2 4.14 0.14 4.15 0.14 -0.01 0.20 -0.03 121 0.976Week4 3.69 0.17 3.86 0.18 -0.17 0.24 -0.70 111 0.486Week6 3.07 0.18 3.48 0.19 -0.40 0.27 -1.52 104 0.131Week8 2.63 0.18 3.10 0.19 -0.47 0.26 -1.79 103 0.077

CGI-BPchangeofdepressionscorefrombaselineWeek2 3.49 0.13 3.44 0.14 0.05 0.19 0.27 121 0.788Week4 3.37 0.16 3.46 0.17 -0.09 0.24 -0.37 101 0.710Week6 2.79 0.17 3.21 0.18 -0.42 0.25 -1.68 90 0.097Week8 2.52 0.19 2.96 0.19 -0.44 0.27 -1.65 117 0.101

CGI-BPseverityofmaniascoreateachvisitBaseline 1.03 0.02 1.03 0.02 0.00 0.03 -0.07 122 0.948Week2 1.11 0.04 1.07 0.04 0.04 0.06 0.68 121 0.496Week4 1.13 0.05 1.07 0.05 0.06 0.07 0.92 79 0.360Week6 1.07 0.03 1.07 0.03 0.00 0.05 0.08 54 0.940Week8 1.15 0.06 1.13 0.06 0.02 0.08 0.31 78 0.757

61

3


Because12patients(18.8%)receivinglamotrigineversus4patients(6.7%)intheplacebogrouphadbeenrapidcyclersinthepastyear(differenceapproachingstatisticalsignificance[p=.06,Fisherexacttest]),thissubgroupwasthesubjectofaposthocanalysis,revealing8(66.7%)lamotrigineand1(25%)placeborespondersbyMADRSand/orCGI-BPchangeofdepression(p=.26,Fisherexacttest).Fourpatients(25%)ofthe16rapidcyclingpatients(all4receivinglamotrigine)hadamanicorhypomanicepisodeversus3patients(2.8%)of108non–rapidcyclingpatients(1patientreceivinglamotrigine,2patientsreceivingplacebo).Overbothtreatmentconditions,theswitchratetomaniaorhypomaniawassignificantlyhigherintherapidcyclingversusthenon–rapidcyclingpatients(p=.005,Fisherexacttest). OnthedifferentMADRSitems,therewasasignificantdifferenceafter8weeksbetweenlamotrigineandplaceboonapparentsadness,reportedsadness,reducedappetite,lassitude,inabilitytofeel,andsuicidalthoughts.Thesamplesizewastoosmalltodetectthefollowingtreatment-by-subgroupinteractions:bipolarIversusII,rapidcyclingversusnon–rapidcycling,andsevereversuslessseveredepressionatbaseline.Asite-bytreatmentanalysiswasnotdoneasitwasnotforeseenintheprotocol.

62 Chapter 362

Figure 2. SeverityofdepressionaccordingtothemeanMADRSscoreateachvisitforpatientsreceivingplaceboorlamotrigine

Table 3. Efficacyresults:responseandswitchto(hypo)mania*

Boldvaluesindicatesignificantlevels<0.05*adjustedforgender,bipolarI/II,age,lithiumandrapidcycling**1missing***CGI-BPseverityofmania≥3****ReductionMADRS≥50%and/orCGI-BPchangeofdepression≤2andCGI-BPseverityof

mania<3

Lamotriginen=64

Placebon=60

Statistic PResponse N % N %ReductionMADRS≥50%

33 51.6 19 31.7 fisher 0.030

CGI-BPchangeofdepression≤2

41 64.1 29 49.2** fisher 0.105

Eitherorboth 42 65.6 29 49.2** fisher 0.065Switchto(hypo)mania***

5 7.8 2 3.3 fisher 0.441

Responseandnoswitchto(hypo)mania****

39 60.9 28 46.7 fisher 0.149

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale

*p=.031**p=.006

30

25

20

15

10

5

0Baseline Wk2 Wk4 Wk6 Wk8

PlaceboLamotrigine

***

MA

DRS

Sco

re,m

ean

63

3


Safety

Fivepatientshadaseriousadverseevent(SAE).Onepatientintheplacebogroupexperiencedasevererash.Asthiswasanunexpectedfinding,wecheckedtherandomizationcodeforpossiblemistakesandaskedthelaboratorytocheckthepillsdirectly;bothchecksrevealedthatthemedicationwasindeedplacebo.Sowedecidedthatthiswasachancefinding.FourSAEsoccurredinthelamotriginegroup.Onepatientdevelopedamanicpsychoticepisoderequiringhospitalization.Theepisoderesolvedcompletelyafterstoppingofthestudymedicationandwithadditionaltreatment.The3otherSAEswithlamotrigineinvolved1patientwithseverehypertensionthatwasconsideredtobeunrelatedtostudydrug,1patientwithanonseverelithiumintoxication(lithiumlevel,1.36mmol/L,unexplainedandprobablynottheresultofanautointoxication),and1patientwhohadtobehospitalizedduetodeteriorationofdepressivesymptoms.Studymedicationwascontinuedinthepatientswiththelithiumintoxicationandthehypertensionandwasstoppedintheotherpatients. Otheradverseeventsoccurringinmorethan5%ineithergrouparepresentedintable4.Mostoftheadverseeventsweremildormoderate.Therewerenostatisticallysignificantdifferencesbetweenthe2groupsinoccurrenceofadverseevents.Inparticular,therewasnodifferenceintheincidenceofskinrash(4.7%forlamotriginevs.6.7%forplacebo,p=.71). Asmentionedbefore,1patientinthelamotriginegroupdevelopedamanicepisodewithpsychoticfeaturesforwhichhewashospitalized(SAE).Inadditiontothispatient,4patientsreceivinglamotrigineand2patientsreceivingplacebodevelopedahypomanicepisode(CGI-BPseverityofmania=3).Thenumberofmanicorhypomanicswitcheswasnotstatisticallydifferent.Combinedresponseandnoswitchintomaniaorhypomaniawasobtainedin39patients(60.9%)receivinglamotrigineand28patients(46.7%)receivingplacebo(p=.149).

64 Chapter 364

Table 4. Adverseeventsoccuringin≥5%ofpatientsinanygroup

Discussion

Toourknowledgethisisthefirstrandomizedcontrolledtrialtoassesstheefficacyoflamotrigineasadd-ontreatmenttoongoinglithiumtherapyinpatientswithbipolardepression.Theresultsshowaclinicallysignificant(>4points)differenceinfavoroflamotrigineontheprimaryoutcomemeasure(changefrombaselineinMADRSscore)andonseveralsecondaryoutcomemeasures,includingMADRSscoresatweeks6and8,thepercentageofMADRSrespondersatendpoint,and6of10itemsontheMADRS,includingcoredepressivesymptomsasapparentsadness,reportedsadness,inabilitytofeel,andsuicidalthoughts.ResultsobtainedwiththeCGI-BPchangeofdepressionwereequivocal,withweeklyscoresandoverallresponseratesnumericallyfavoringlamotriginebutnotreachingstatisticalsignificance.ThiscouldbeduetolimitationsinthesensitivityoftheCGI-BP.Anotherpossibilityisthatthisresultedfromamoreoptimisticimpressionamongthephysicianswhenassessingtheeffectoftreatmentsincestartoftreatment,comparedwiththecross-sectionally–

Lamotrigine(n=64)

Placebo(n=60)

AdverseEvent N % N % PHeadache 12 18.8 9 15.0 0.64Fatigue 9 14.1 7 11.7 0.79Nausea 8 12.5 4 6.7 0.37Flu-likesymptoms 7 10.9 4 6.7 0.52Insomnia 6 9.4 1 1.7 0.12Tremor 5 7.8 1 1.7 0.21Skinproblems/mildrash 5 7.8 1 1.7 0.21Dizziness 1 1.6 5 8.3 0.17Abdominalpain 4 6.3 3 5.0 1.00Rash 3 4.7 4 6.7 0.71Joint/musclepain 2 3.1 4 6.7 0.43Backpain 2 3.1 3 5.0 0.67Agitation 1 1.6 3 5.0 0.35

65

3


assessedMADRS.However,previouslamotriginestudiesdidshowsignificantchangeinCGIratingsofdepressedbipolarpatients(23–25). Thisstudyindicatesefficacyforlamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression,whichcomplementssimilarfindingsin2previousstudieswithlamotriginemonotherapy(17,23).However,4subsequentplacebocontrolledtrialswithlamotriginemonotherapywereallnegative,possiblybecauseofhighplaceboresponse(35%–47%asassessedbyMADRSorHAM-D-17)orlackofintrinsicefficacy(20),whileinanotherstudylamotriginewaslesseffectivebutbettertoleratedthanacombinationofolanzapineandfluoxetine(22). Besidesthepossibilityofachanceeffect,thereareseveralpossibleexplanationsforourpositivefindingcomparedwithprevious,mostlynegativestudies.First,thiswasanadd-onstudyinwhichallpatientsreceivedlithium,atreatmentthatappearstohavesomeefficacyonitsowninthetreatmentofbipolardepression(30).Thecombinationoflithiumandlamotriginemayhaveproducedadditiveeffects,ortheefficacyoflamotriginemayhavebeenenhancedbyconcurrentlithiumtreatment.Althoughthismightbespeculative,thepotentiallysynergicactioncouldcomeasaresultofcommonfinaltherapeuticpathwaysinvolvingpresynapticserotoninreleaseandincreasedneuroplasticity(31,32).Apharmacokineticinteractionseemsunlikelyinviewofapreviouslyconducteddruginteractionstudy(33).Ontheotherhand,theadd-ondesigncouldhavereducedthechanceofpositivefindings,since,asageneralrule,thistypeoftrialislesslikelytobesuccessfulinbipolardisorder(34). Second,therelativelylowoveralldropoutrate(17.7%)inthecurrentstudypermittedarobustefficacyassessmentduetofewermissingdata.Thus,itaffirmstheutilityofadd-onstudydesignsinthispatientpopulation.Thelowdropoutratemaybeattributabletovariousreasons.First,allpatientshadtheoptiontogetanantidepressantduringthesecondphaseofthestudy,iftheyshouldnotrespondtothestudydrugattheendofthedouble-blindtrial.Second,thereisadifferenceinhealthcaresystemsinthecountriesinwhichourstudywasconductedcomparedtothehealthcaresystemsinwhichpreviouslamotriginestudies(21)wereconducted.IntheNetherlandsandSpainallinhabitantshaveamandatoryhealthinsuranceprogramthatpaysforthetreatmentofbipolar

66 Chapter 366

disorder,whereasthisisnotthecaseintheUnitedStates,whereallthenegativeacutetrialswereconducted.Thismeansthatmostpatientscouldstaywiththeirownphysician,evenduringtheirparticipationinthetrial. Theresponsetolamotrigineoccurredratherlate.In2recenttrialscomparingquetiapinewithplaceboinbipolardepressionandinthetrialwiththecombinationofolanzapineplusfluoxetineversusplacebo,therewasaseparationbetweenmedicationandplaceboafter1week(8,9).Inourstudy,thisseparationoccurredat6weeks,whichiscomparablewiththeseparationat5weeksinthepriorpositivestudywithlamotriginemonotherapy(18)Thisdelayedeffectoflamotriginemightbeduetotheslowtitrationoflamotrigine. Switchtomaniaorhypomaniaoccurredin7patients:in5patientswhoweretakinglamotrigineandin2patientstakingplacebo.Changingmoodstatesformthecorefeatureofbipolardisorder;placeboresponseisalwaysafactortoconsider,especiallyinrapidcyclingpatientswhotypicallyhavefrequentepisodesofrelativelyshortduration.Althoughsevererapidcycling(morethan10episodesinthelastyear)wasanexclusioncriterion,nearly13%ofenrolledpatientsmetDSM-IVcriteriaforrapidcycling(4–9episodes),whichiscomparablewiththeoverallfrequency(15%)ofrapidcyclingreportedinpreviousstudies(3).Inthequetiapineversusplacebostudy(9),18.2%ofthepatientswererapidcyclers.Intheolanzapine(plusfluoxetine)versusplacebostudy(8),morethan35%ofthepatientswererapidcyclers.Althoughtherapidcyclingpatientsshowedmoreswitchesthanthenon-rapidcyclingpatients,wedidnotdetectadifferenceinefficacy,unlike2recentstudies(35,36),whichindicatedagreatershort-termresponsetoolanzapineorclozapineinrapidcyclingversusnon-rapidcyclingpatients.However,detectionofanysuchdifferencemayhavebeenhamperedbylackofstatisticalpowerforthissubgroupandconfoundedbyanear-significantdifferenceintheincidenceofrapidcyclingbetweenthelamotrigineandplacebogroups. Inthisstudy,thecombinationoflithiumandlamotriginewaswelltolerated.Therewererelativelyfewseriousadverseeventsforthispopulationandotheradverseeventswereallmildormoderateanddidnotdifferinfrequencyfromplacebo.Therelativelylowrateofskinrashobservedinthis

67

3


studymaybeattributabletoslowtitrationoflamotrigineinaccordancewiththemanufacturer’srecommendationsandconfirmsthatlithiumdoesnotincreasetheriskoflamotrigine-inducedrash.Themostimportantlimitationofourstudyistherelativelysmalloverallsamplesize(smallerthaninitiallyplanned),whichdidnotpermitsubgroupanalysesforassessmentofresponsepredictorsandmoderators.Anotherlimitationisthatwehavenoreliabledataregardingthenumberofbipolarpatientsinthestudycenterswhodevelopedadepressiveepisodewhilebeingtreatedwithlithiumandwhowerenotselectedforthestudy.Finally,wehavenosufficientdataonpatients’recenttreatmenthistoriestosuggestwherethecombinationoflithiumandlamotriginemightfitwithintreatmentalgorithms. Becausemanybipolardepressedpatientsdonotrespondadequatelytomonotherapy,thereisanurgentneedforstudiesaddressingtheefficacyofothertreatmentregimens,includingcombinationswithmoodstabilizers.Currentlypublishedplacebo-controlledstudieshaveonlyaddressedthecombinationofanantidepressant(paroxetineorimipramine)withlithium(13),ofolanzapineplusfluoxetine(8)andoftheadditionofanantidepressanttovariousmoodstabilizersand/oratypicalantipsychotics(12).Ourstudyisthefirstplacebo-controlledstudythataddressedthecombinationoflamotrigineandlithiuminbipolardepression.Thiscombinationhasbeenconsideredinteresting,especiallysinceinthe2long-termstudiescomparingbothlamotrigineandlithiumwithplacebo,lithiumwasespeciallyeffectiveinthepreventionofmanicepisodesandlamotrigineespeciallyeffectiveinthepreventionofdepressiveepisodes(24,25). Regardingclinicalconsequences,severalquestionsremainabouttheplaceofthecombinationoflamotrigineandlithiuminthetreatmentofbipolardepression.Antidepressantsremainanotherpossibleoptioninthetreatmentofbipolardepressioninpatientsusinglithium(8,11,37–39). However,theirusemaybeassociatedwiththeriskofaswitchtomaniaorhypomania(8,11,37–39).Furtherstudiesareneededtocomparetheseandotheroptions,suchas(combinationswith)atypicalantipsychotics.Anotherquestioniswhethertheeffectsoflamotrigineandlithiumwillbemaintainedintheresponders;thiswillbeaddressedinthenotyetanalyzed,1-yearcontinuationphaseofthisstudy.

68 Chapter 368

References

1. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJ,etal.Aprospectiveinvestigationofthenaturalhistoryofthelong-termweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:261–269

2. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJ,etal.Thelong-termnaturalhistoryoftheweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2002;59:530–537

3. KupkaRW,LuckenbaughDA,PostRM,etal.Comparisonofrapid-cyclingandnon-rapid-cyclingbipolardisorderbasedonprospectivemoodratingsin539outpatients.AmJPsychiatry2005;162:1273–1280

4. CalabreseJR,HirschfeldRMA,FryeMA,etal.Impactofdepressivesymptomscomparedwithmanicsymptomsinbipolardisorder:resultsofaUScommunity-basedsample.JClinPsychiatry2004;65(11)1499–1504

5. ErnstCL,GoldbergJF.Antidepressantpropertiesofanticonvulsantdrugsforbipolardisorder.JClinPsychopharmacol2003;23:182–192

6. MalhiGS,MitchellPB,SalimS.Bipolardepression:managementoptions.CNSDrugs2003;17:9–25

7. GeddesJR,BurgessS,HawtonK,etal.Long-termlithiumtherapyforbipolardisorder:systematicreviewandmeta-analysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004;161:217–222

8. TohenM,VietaE,CalabreseJ,etal.Efficacyofolanzapineandolanzapine-fluoxetinecombinationinthetreatmentofbipolarIdepression.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:1079–1088

9. CalabreseJR,KeckPEJr.,MacfaddenW,etal.Arandomized,doubleblind,placebo-controlledtrialofquetiapineinthetreatmentofbipolarIorIIdepression.AmJPsychiatry2005Jul;16(7)2:1351–1360

10.GaoK,GajwaniP,ElhajO,etal.Typicalandatypicalantipsychoticsinbipolardepression.JClinPsychiatry2005;66(11):1376–1385

11.GijsmanHJ,GeddesJR,RendellJM,etal.Antidepressantsforbipolardepression:asystematicreviewofrandomized,controlledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004;161:1537–1547

69

3


12. SachsGS,NierenbergAA,CalabreseJR,etal.Effectivenessofadjunctiveantidepressanttreatmentforbipolardepression.NEnglJMed2007;356:1711–1722

13.NemeroffCB,EvansDL,GyulaiL,etal.Double-blind,placebo-controlledcomparisonofimipramineandparoxetineinthetreatmentofbipolardepression.AmJPsychiatry2001;158:906–912

14.AltshulerLL,PostRM,LeverichGS,etal.Antidepressant-inducedmaniaandcycleacceleration:acontroversyrevisited.AmJPsychiatry1995;152:1130–1138

15. SpornJ,SachsG.Theanticonvulsantlamotrigineintreatment-resistantmanic-depressiveillness.JClinPsychopharmacol1997;17:185–189

16. KusumakarV,YathamLN.Anopenstudyoflamotrigineinrefractorybipolardepression.PsychiatryRes1997;72:145–148

17.CalabreseJR,FatemiSH,WoyshvilleMJ.Antidepressanteffectsoflamotrigineinrapidcyclingbipolardisorder.AmJPsychiatry1996;153(9):1236

18.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGS,etal.Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup.JClinPsychiatry1999;60(2):79–88

19.GoldsmithDR,WagstaffAJ,IbbotsonT,etal.Lamotrigine:areviewofitsuseinbipolardisorder.Drugs2003;63:2029–2050

20.CalabreseJR,HuffmanRF,WhiteRL,etal.Lamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:resultsoffivedouble-blind,placebo-controlledclinicaltrials.BipolarDisord2008;10:323–333

21.GeddesJ,HuffmanRF,PaskaW,etal.Lamotrigineforacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:additionalclinicaltrialdataandaretrospectivepooledanalysisofresponseratesacrossallrandomizedtrialsconductedbyGSK.BipolarDisord2007;8(suppl1):32

22. BrownEB,McElroySL,KeckPE,Jr.,etal.A7-week,randomized,double-blindtrialofolanzapine/fluoxetinecombinationversuslamotrigineinthetreatmentofbipolarIdepression.JClinPsychiatry2006;67(7):1025–1033

23. FryeMA,KetterTA,KimbrellTA,etal.Aplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotrigineandgabapentinmonotherapyinrefractorymooddisorders.JClinPsychopharmacol2000;20:607–614

70 Chapter 370

24.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsG,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlydepressedpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.JClinPsychiatry2003;64(9):1013–1024

25. BowdenCL,CalabreseJR,SachsG,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:392–400

26. SheehanDV,LecrubierY,SheehanKH,etal.TheMini-InternationalNeuropsychiatricInterview(M.I.N.I.):thedevelopmentandvalidationofastructureddiagnosticpsychiatricinterviewforDSM-IVandICD-10.JClinPsychiatry1998;59(suppl20):22–33

27.MontgomerySA,ÅsbergM.Anewdepressionscaledesignedtobesensitivetochange.BrJPsychiatry1979;134:382–389

28. SpearingMK,PostRM,LeverichGS,etal.Modificationoftheclinicalglobalimpressions(CGI)scaleforuseinbipolarillness(BP):theCGI-BP.PsychiatryResearch1997;73:159–171

29. LeverichGS,NolenWA,RushAJ,etal.TheStanleyFoundationBipolarTreatmentOutcomeNetwork.I.Longitudinalmethodology.JAffectDisord2001;67(1–3):3344

30. BhagwagarZ,GoodwinGM.Theroleoflithiuminthetreatmentofbipolardepression.ClinNeurosciRes2002;2:222–227

31.ConsoniFT,VitalMA,AndreatiniR.Dualmonoaminemodulationfortheantidepressant-likeeffectoflamotrigineinthemodifiedforcedswimmingtest.EurNeuropsychopharmacol2006;16:451–458

32.CorbellaB,VietaE.Moleculartargetsoflithiumaction.ActaNeuropsychiatrica2003;15:1–25

33.ChenC,VeroneseL,YinY.Theeffectsoflamotrigineonthepharmacokineticsoflithium.BrJClinPharmacol2000;50:193–195

34. VietaE,CarneX.Theuseofplaceboinclinicaltrialsonbipolardisorder:anewapproachforanolddebate.PsychotherPsychosom2005;74:10–16

35. VietaE,CalabreseJR,HennenJ,etal.Comparisonofrapid-cyclingandnon-rapid-cyclingbipolarImanicpatientsduringtreatmentwitholanzapine:analysisofpooleddata.JClinPsychiatry2004(10);65:1420–1428

71

3


36. SuppesT,OzcanME,CarmodyT.Responsetoclozapineofrapidcyclingversusnon-cyclingpatientswithahistoryofmania.BipolarDisord2004;6:329–332

37. PostRM,AltshulerLL,LeverichGS,etal.Moodswitchinbipolardepression:comparisonofadjunctivevenlafaxine,bupropionandsertraline.BrJPsychiatry2006;189:124–131

38. VietaE,Martinez-AranA,GoikoleaJM,etal.Arandomizedtrialcomparingparoxetineandvenlafaxineinthetreatmentofbipolardepressedpatientstakingmoodstabilizers.JClinPsychiatry2002;63(6):508–512

39. LeverichGS,AltshulerLL,FryeMA,etal.Riskofswitchinmoodpolaritytohypomaniaormaniainpatientswithbipolardepressionduringacuteandcontinuationtrialsofvenlafaxine,sertraline,andbupropionasadjunctstomoodstabilizers.AmJPsychiatry2006;163:232–239

Efficacy and safety of two treatment algorithms in bipolar depression consisting of a combination of lithium, lamotrigine or placebo and paroxetine

4

M.L.M.vanderLoos1,P.Mulder2,E.G.Th.M.Hartong3,M.B.J.Blom4,A.C.Vergouwen5,M.S.vanNoorden6,M.A.Timmermans7,E.Vieta8,W.A.Nolen9,fortheLamLitStudyGroup.

1 DepartmentofPsychiatry,IsalaKlinieken,LocationSophia,Zwolle,

2 DepartmentofBiostatistics,ErasmusUniversityMedicalCenter,Rotterdam,

3 DepartmentofPsychiatry,Canisius-WilhelminaHospital,Nijmegen,

4 ParnassiaPsychiatricInstitute,TheHague,5 DepartmentofPsychiatrySintLucasAndreasHospital,

Amsterdam,6 DepartmentofPsychiatry,LeidenUniversityMedicalCenter,

Leiden,7 PraktijkondersteuningZuidOostBrabant,Veldhoven,

theNetherlands,8 BipolarDisordersProgram,CIBERSAMInstituteof

Neuroscience,HospitalClinic,UniversityofBarcelona,IDIBAPS,Barcelona,Catalonia,Spainand

9 DepartmentofPsychiatry,UniversityMedicalCenterGroningen,UniversityofGroningen,Groningen,theNetherlands

Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 2010; 122: 246-254

74 Chapter 474

Abstract

Objective:Inapreviouspaper,wereportedabouttheefficacyoftheadditionoflamotriginetolithiuminpatientswithbipolardepression.Inthesecondphaseofthisstudyparoxetinewasaddedtoongoingtreatmentinnon-responders. Method:Bipolardepressedpatients(n=124)treatedwithlithiumwererandomizedtoadditionoflamotrigineorplacebo.Innonrespondersafter8weeks,paroxetine20mgwasaddedforanother8weekstoongoingtreatment. Results:After8weekstheimprovementinpatientstreatedwithlamotriginevs.patientstreatedwithplacebowassignificant.Afteradditionofparoxetinethisdifferencedisappearedasaresultofgreaterfurtherimprovementinthenon-responderstoplacebo. Conclusion:Additionoflamotriginetolithiumwasfoundeffectiveinbipolardepressedpatients.Furtheradditionofparoxetineinnonresponderstolithiumpluslamotriginedidnotappeartoprovideadditionalbenefit,whileitappearedtodosoinnon-responderstolithiumplusplacebo.

Significant outcomes

• Additionoflamotrigineismoreeffectivethantheadditionofplaceboinbipolardepressedpatientsalreadyusinglithium.

• Paroxetineadditioninnon-responderstotheformertreatmentappearedtoprovidebenefitfornonresponderstolithiumplusplacebobutnotfornon-responderstolithiumpluslamotrigine.

• Thecombinationoflithiumpluslamotrigineplusparoxetinewaswelltoleratedandsafe.Tremorwastheonlyadverseeventthatseparatedbetweenlamotrigineandplacebo.Therewerenodifferencesbetweenlamotrigineandplaceboinseriousadverseevents.

75

4

Efficacy and safety of two treatment algorithms in bipolar depression consisting of a combination of lithium, lamotrigine or placebo and paroxetine 75

Limitations

• Thesamplesizeofthenon-responderstolithiumpluslamotrigineorplacebowasrelativelysmall.

• Theadditionofparoxetineinthesecondphaseofthestudywasopenanduncontrolled.

• Thedurationofthisstudywasshortinregardtothelifelongpatternofmoodepisodesinbipolardisorder.Efficacyandsafetyoftwotreatmentalgorithmsinbipolardepression.

Introduction

Since1993casereportsontheeffectivenessoflamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepressionhavebeenpublished(1–3).Thefirstplacebo-controlledrandomizedcontrolledtrial(RCT)showingefficacyoflamotriginemonotherapywasnegativeontheprimaryoutcomecriteriontheHamiltonRatingScaleforDepression(HAMD)(4)butpositiveonseveralsecondaryoutcomemeasuresincludingtheMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS)(5,6).Fourmonotherapystudiesthereafter(7)(1999–2006)wereallnegativeontheprimaryoutcomecriterion(theMADRS),althoughameta-analysisofallthesefivestudiesshowedasmallbutstatisticallysignificantpositiveresult(8).Paroxetineisaselectiveserotoninre-uptakeinhibitor(SSRI)whichisverybroadlyusedforthetreatmentofmajordepressivedisorder,andwhichhasalsobeentestedinseveralRCTsinbipolardepressionbothasmonotherapyandasadjunctivetherapy(9–13).AlthoughthesestudieswerenotpositiveandSSRIsarecurrentlynotviewedasafirst-linetreatmentoptioninthetreatmentofbipolardepression,theymayplayaroleinpatientswhoareresistanttofirst-linetherapies(14).Inapreviouspaper,wedescribedtheresultsofaplacebo-controlledRCTexaminingtheefficacyandsafetyoftheadditionoflamotrigineduring8weeksinbipolarpatientswithabreak-throughdepressionduringtreatmentwithlithium(15).ChangeinMADRSscorescomparedwithbaselinewassignificantlygreateraftertheadditionoflamotriginetolithiumthanafterthe

76 Chapter 476

additionofplacebo.Responserate(definedasadecreaseofatleast50%oftheinitialMADRSscore)wasalsosignificantlygreaterwithlamotriginecomparedtoplacebo.Inthispaper,wedescribetheresultsoftwodifferenttreatmentalgorithms;treatmentwithlamotrigineaddedtolithiumduringthefirst8weeks(firstphase)followedbyfurtheradditionofparoxetineinnon-respondersduringweeks9–16(secondphase)vs.8weeksoftreatmentwithlithiumplusplacebo(firstphase)alsofollowedbyfurtheradditionofparoxetineinnon-responders(secondphase)duringweeks9–16.

Aims of the study Theaimofthisrandomizedcontrolledtrialwastocomparetheefficacy,safetyandtolerabilityoftwotreatmentalgorithmsinpatientssufferingfromabipolardepression.Patientsusinglithium(firststep)witharelapseorrecurrenceofabipolardepressionwererandomizedtotheadditionoflamotrigineorplacebo(secondstep),20mgparoxetinewassubsequentlyaddedtonon-respondersoftheformer2steps(thirdstep).

Material and methods

Study design Thisarticledescribesthecombinedresultsofboththefirstandsecondphaseofaninvestigatorinitiated(WN)study.Inthefirstphase,124patientswererecruitedin23out-patientcentersintheNetherlands(n=112)and3centersinSpain(n=12)between2002and2005(15).Duringthesecondphaseofthisstudyparoxetine20mgwasopenlabeladdedtonon-respondersatweek8.Lithium(openlabel)andlamotrigineorplacebo(double-blind)wascontinuedatthesamedose.ThestudywasapprovedbytheethicalreviewboardoftheUniversityMedicalCenterUtrecht,Utrecht,theNetherlandsandbylocalinstitutionalreviewboardsintheNetherlandsandinSpain.Allpatientssignedinformedconsentpriortothestartofanystudyprocedures.

77

4


Patients Patients(age18–65)wereeligibleforthisstudyiftheysufferedfrombipolardisorderwithamajordepressiveepisodeaccordingtoDSM-IVcriteriaconfirmedbytheMINIplus(16),ascoreof≥18ontheMADRS(6)andaClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllness(CGI-BP)(17)severityscoreof≥4(moderatelyill).Allpatientswereonlong-termtreatmentwithlithium,withalithiumplasmalevelbetween0.6and1.2mmforatleast2weeksbeforethestartofthestudy.Patientswithpsychoticfeatures,withasevererapidcyclingpattern(morethan10episodesintheprecedingyear)withseveresuicidality(scoreonitem10oftheMADRS≥5)orwithahistoryofalcoholorsubstanceabusewithin1monthpriortothestartofthestudyordependencewithin12months,wereexcluded.Nopatientshadneurologicalorothersomaticillnessesknowntoaffectmood.Femalepatientswerenotpregnant(negativepregnancytestpriortothestudy)andwererequiredtouseaneffectivecontraceptivemethod.Patientswerenotallowedtotakepsychotropicsotherthanstudymedications,exceptforbenzodiazepinesatamaximumof2mglorazepamequivalents⁄day.

Treatments Duringthefirstphaseofthestudy(week0–8)patients(n=124)receiveddouble-blindtreatmentwithlamotrigine(uptitratedto200mg⁄day)orplaceboaddedtoongoingtreatmentwithlithium(119patientshadplasmalevelsbetweenthepredefinedrangeof0.6–1.2mm;fivepatientsbetween0.53and0.6mm.Beforedeblindingitwasdecidedtoacceptthisminorprotocolviolation,thusincludingthesepatientsintheanalysis.Duringthesecondphase(week9–16)openlabelparoxetinewasaddedatafixeddoseof20mg⁄dayinnon-respondersatweek8(CGI-BPchangeof3ormore,i.e.minimallyimproved,unchangedorworsecomparedwithbaseline),whiledosagesoflithiumandlamotrigineorplacebo(stillgivendouble-blind)werekeptstablethroughoutthesecondphase.Respondersattheendofthefirstphasewerealsofollowedandmaintainedtheirsamedosagesoflithiumandlamotrigineorplacebo.

78 Chapter 478

Outcome measures Patientvisitswerescheduledatbaseline(week0)andfromthenonwardevery2weeks.MADRSscoresandtheCGI-BPSeverityofDepressionandManiascoreswereassessedateachvisit.TheprimaryoutcomeforthesecondstudyphasewaschangefrombaselineonthetotalMADRSscoreatweek16.SecondaryoutcomemeasuresweretotalMADRSscoreatweek16orendpoint,CGI-BPseverityofdepressionandofmaniaatweek16orendpointandresponse.ResponsewasdefinedasadecreaseontheMADRSof≥50%and⁄orGCI-BPchangeof1or2(verymuchormuchimproved)comparedwithbaseline.Anadditionaloutcomemeasurewasswitchto(hypo)mania,definedasascoreof≥3(mildlyill)ontheCGI-BPseverityofmaniascale.Posthocwealsoidentifiedpatientswhohadrespondedwithoutaswitchto(hypo)mania.Ateachvisitadverseeventswereassessedandifpresentratedaccordingtotheirseverityasmild,moderateorsevere.

Statistics Mixedmodelanovaforrepeatedmeasures(MMRM)wasprospectivelychosenasmethodofanalysisforMADRSscores.Theindependentvariablesinthisanalysiswere:time,treatmentandtheirinteraction.TimeascategoricalvariableallowedestimatingandtestingmeandifferencesinMADRSbetweenthetwotreatmentsatanyvisit,includingtheprimaryefficacymeasureforthisstudyphase:changefrombaselineatweek16.Forthispurpose,therelevantcontrastswerespecifiedinthemodelforwhichtheanovaproducedtheestimates,SEs,confidenceintervalsandappropriatet-testspervisit.Tomakeinferenceaboutanoveralltreatmenteffectoverallvisitsineitherphaseofthestudy,timewasconsideredanumerictrendvariableinamixedmodelthatallowedatrend-break(‘brokenstick’)atthetransitionfromthefirsttothesecondphase.Inthismodel,adifferenceintimetrendbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsineitherphaseandchangesintimetrendbetweenthetwophasesineithertreatmentgroupwereestimatedandtested.OnthebasisofthismodelpredictedMADRSscoreswerecalculated(with95%confidenceintervals)andtestedbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsatweek8(endofphaseI)andatweek16(endofphaseII).In

79

4


accordancewiththeintenttotreatprinciple,allrandomizedsubjectscontributedtotheseanalyzes,missingvaluesofMADRSscoresbeingproperlyadjustedforbytherestrictedmaximumlikelihoodestimationprocedureusedinthemixedmodelanova’s. ClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllnessseverityscoresweresimilarlyanalyzedusingmixedmodelanovawithtimeascategoricalvariable.Dichotomousoutcomescores(response,switchorpresenceofadverseeffects)werecomparedbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsusingFisher’sexacttestandlastobservationcarriedforwardformissingdata.DifferencesinthedistributionofcategoricalnominalvariablesbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsweretestedusingFisher’sexacttest,forcategoricalordinalvariablestheexactChi-squaretrendtestwasused.Foreachtestatwo-sidedP-valuebelow0.05wasconsideredtodenotestatisticalsignificance.

Results

Theflowchartofthestudyispresentedinfigure1.Duringthefirstphase64patientsreceivedadd-onlamotrigineand60patientsreceivedadd-onplacebo.Therewerenostatisticalsignificantdifferencesbetweenthetwogroupsinpatientscharacteristicsorillnessseverityatbaseline(15)(table1).Inthelamotriginegroup52patients(81.3%)completedthefirst8weeksofthestudy,37ofthemasrespondersand15asnon-responders.Afterthefirstphase,ninepatients(14.1%)droppedoutleaving43patientswhoagreedtoparticipateinthesecondphase;34respondersand9non-responders.Duringthesecondphaseanotherfourpatientsdroppedout.Intheplacebogroup50patients(83.3%)completedthefirst8weeks,28asrespondersand22asnon-responders.Sixpatients(10%)droppedout,leaving44patients(26respondersand18non-responders)whocontinuedthestudy.Duringthesecondphaseanothersixpatientsdroppedout.

80 Chapter 480

Figure 1. Flowchartofthestudy

Notmeetinginclusioncriteria:3Nottakenstudymedication:1

Responders:34 Responders:26

Phas

eII

Phas

eI

Assessed:128

Randomised:124

PlusLamotrigine:64

Completed:52

Non-responders:15Responders:37

Continued:34

Completed:31 Completed:8 Completed:14

Continued:26

Completed:24

Plusparoxetine:9 Plusparoxetine:18

Responders:28

PlusPlacebo:60

Completed:50

Non-responders:22

Drop-outs:10

Drop-outs:3

Lackofefficacy:1Withdrawnconsent:1Protocolviolation:1

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:12

Drop-outs:2

Lackofefficacy:1Adverseevents:1

Drop-outs:6

Noncompliance:1

Lackofefficacy:2Adverseevents:2

81

4


Table 1. Patientandillnesscharacteristics

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDespressionRatingScale,CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllnes,TCA=tricyclicantidepressant,SSRI=selectiveserotoninre-uptakeinhibitor,SNRI=serotonin-noradrenalinre-uptakeinhibitor,MAO=monoamineoxidaseinhibitor.

Lamotriginen=64

Placebon=60

Totaln=124 Statistic Value df P

Femalegender(n,%)

37 57.8 30 50 67 54.0 Fisher’s - - 0.471

Age(years)(mean,SD)

45.2 12.1 47.6 11.6 46.4 11.9 t-test 1.13 122 0.261

IlnesscharacteristicsBipolarIdisorder(n,%)

43 67.2 41 68.3 84 67.7 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Rapidcyclingcourse–last12months

12 18.8 4 6.7 16 12.9 Fisher’s - - 0.061

MADRS(mean,SD)

28.25 5.97 28.82 6.24 28.52 6.08 t-test 0.52 122 0.606

CGI-BPdepressionseverity(mean,SD)

4.56 0.64 4.53 0.57 4.55 0.60 ChiSq.trend

0.07 1 0.882


1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Lithiumplasmalevelatbaseline(mEq)(mean,SD)

0.82 0.16 0.84 0.16 0.83 0.16 t-test 0.48 122 0.634

Previousothertreatmentsforindexdepressiveepisode(n,%)TCA 6 9.4 4 6.7 10 8.1 Fisher’s - - 0.745SSRI/SNRI 15 23,4 16 26.7 31 25.0 Fisher’s - - 0.836MAO-inhibitor 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.353Antipsychotic,typical

4 6.3 3 5.0 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Antipsychotic,atypical

15 23.4 11 18.3 26 21.0 Fisher’s - - 0.317

Valproicacid 5 7.8 2 3.3 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.247Carbamazepine 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.285Benzodiazepine 44 68.8 35 58.3 79 63.7 Fisher’s - - 0.154Other 3 4.7 4 6.7 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.464

82 Chapter 482

Efficacy Theefficacyresultsoverbothstudy-phasesfromamixedmodelanovawithtimeascategoricalvariablearepresentedintable2.After8weeks,thedifferencebetweenlithiumpluslamotriginevs.lithiumplusplacebointhechangeoftheMADRSscoresfrombaselinetoweek8wassignificant(15);15.37vs.11.16(P=0.029).After16weekstherewasnostatisticallysignificantdifferenceinchangeofMADRSscoresfrombaselinetoweek16betweenlithiumpluslamotrigine(plusparoxetineinnon-responders)vs.lithiumplusplacebo(plusparoxetineinnon-responders);17.91vs.15.40(P=0.253).ThedifferencebetweentotalMADRSscoreswasalsonolongersignificantatweek16:10.34vs.13.42(P=0.134)(fig2).The95%confidenceintervalofthemeandifference(lamotrigineminusplacebo)inMADRSscoreatweek16wasfrom7.13to0.97.

83

4


Table 2. EfficacyResult:severityscales

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale,CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllness.Boldvaluesindicatesignificantlevels<0.05

Lamotriginen=64

Placebon=60 Difference Statistic Value df P

ChangeinMADRSscorefrombaseline(primaryoutcomemeasure)(mean,SE)Week2 -5.30(0.87) -3.74(0.91) -1.56(1.26) t-test -1.23 121 0.220Week4 -9.22(1.25) -6.20(1.30) -3.02(1.81) t-test -1.67 110 0.098Week6 -12.84(1.35) -9.35(1.40) -3.49(1.95) t-test -1.79 104 0.076Week8 -15.37(1.32) -11.16(1.37) -4.22(1.90) t-test -2.22 104 0.029

Week10 -16.88(1.30) -12.14(1.34) -4.74(1.87) t-test -2.54 101 0.013

Week12 -15.68(1.51) -13.22(1.55) -2.46(2.16) t-test -1.14 90 0.258Week14 -17.04(1.39) -15.96(1.43) -1.08(1.99) t-test -0.54 90 0.588Week16 -17.91(1.53) -15.40(1.56) -2.51(2.19) t-test -1.15 83 0.253MADRSscoreateachvisit(mean,SE)Baseline 28.25(0.76) 28.82(0.79) -0.57(1.10) t-test -0.52 122 0.606Week8 12.88(1.23) 17.66(1.28) -4.78(1.78) t-test -2.69 104 0.008

Week16 10.34(1.42) 13.42(1.45) -3.08(2.03) t-test -1.52 76 0.134CGI-BPseverityofdepressionateachvisit(mean,SE)Baseline 4.56(0.08) 4.53(0.08) 0.03(0.11) t-test 0.27 122 0.789Week8 2.63(0.18) 3.08(0.19) -0.45(0.26) t-test -1,69 103 0.093Week16 2.20(0.18) 2.56(0.19) -0.36(0.26) t-test -1.38 82 0.171CGI-BPchangeofdepressionfrombaseline(mean,SE)Week8 2.34(0.17) 2.69(0.17) -0.35(0.24) t-test -1.45 96 0.151Week16 1.79(0.14) 2.15(0.14) -0.36(0.20) t-test -1.80 70 0.076CGI-BPseverityofmaniaateachvisit(mean,SE)Baseline 1.03(0.02) 1.03(0.02) 0.00(0.03) t-test -0.07 122 0.948Week8 1.15(0.06) 1.14(0.06) 0.01(0.08) t-test 0.11 64 0.914Week16 1.38(0.16) 1.30(0.16) 0.07(0.22) t-test 0.32 7 0.761

84 Chapter 484

Figure 2. SeverityofdepressionaccordingtothemeanMADRSscoreateachvisitforpatientsonplaceboandlamotrigine

Responserateswere68.8%(44outof64patients)tothelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinealgorithm,and51.7%(31outof60)(P=0.066)tothelithium-placebo-paroxetinealgorithm,whiletheresponseratesamongcompletersofthestudywere87%(34outof39patients)and73%(27outof37patients)respectively(table3).Othersecondaryoutcomecriteria(allCGI-BPoutcomes)alsodidnotrevealsignificantdifferencesatweek16.

***

*** P<0.05**P<0.01 Additionofparoxetine

Weeks

Mea

nM

AD

RSs

core

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

5

10

15

20

25

30

PlaceboLamotrigine

85

4


Table 3. Efficacyresults:responseandswitchto(hypo)maniaafter8and16weeks

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale;CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllness.Boldvaluesindicatesignificantlevels<0.05*1missing**CGI-BPseverityofmania≥3***ReductionMADRS≥50%and/orCGI-BPchangeofdepression≤2andCGI-BPseverityof

mania<3

Lamotrigine(n=64)

Placebo(n=60) Statistic P

8weeksResponse N % N %ReductionMADRS≥50% 33 (51.6) 19 (31.7) Fisher 0.030

CGI-BPchangeofdepression≤2 41 (64.1) 29 (49.2)* Fisher 0.105Eitherorboth 42 (65.6) 29 (49.2) Fisher 0.065Switchto(hypo)mania** 5 (7.8) 2 (3.3) Fisher 0.441Responseandnoswitchto(hypo)mania***

39 (60.9) 28 (46.7) Fisher 0.149

16weeksResponse N % N %ReductionMADRS≥50% 33 (51.6) 27 (45.0) Fisher 0.478CGI-BPchangeofdepression≤2 43 (67.2) 31 (51.7) Fisher 0.100Eitherorboth 44 (68.8) 31 (51.7) Fisher 0.066Switchto(hypo)mania** 8 (12.5) 5 (8.3) Fisher 0.562Responseandnoswitchto(hypo)mania***

38 (59.4) 29 (48.3) Fisher 0.280

86 Chapter 486

Intable4,theresultsofthepiecewiselinearmodelarepresented.TheestimateddownwardtrendsintimeoftheMADRSscorewhichweresignificantlydifferentbetweentreatmentgroupsinthefirstphase(P=0.009),becamesignificantlylesssteepinthesecondphase(P=0.015intheplacebogroupandP<0.0005inthelamotriginegroup).Inthesecondphase,thedownwardtrendswerenotsignificantlydifferentanymorebetweenthetreatmentgroups(P=0.19).TheMADRSscoresaspredictedbytheestimatedpiecewiselinearmodelinbothtreatmentgroupswassignificantlydifferent(P=0.009)atweek8(endofphase1)andnotsignificantlydifferent(P=0.22)anymoreatweek16(theendofphase2).

Table 4. PredictedMADRSscores(95%CI)atweeks8and16(righttwocolums)andtimetrend(SE)inMADRS-scoreper2weeks(leftfourcolums)accordingtoa‘brokenstick’modelwithatrendbreakatweek8.Theintercept(SE)equals28.23(0.54).

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDespressionRatingScale

Eightpatients(12.5%)inthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinegroupswitchedto(hypo)mania(fivepatients(7.8%)duringthefirst8weeksand3(4.7%)aftertheadditionofparoxetineinnonresponders).Six(9.4%)ofthesepatientshadalsoreachedtheresponsecriterionfordepression.Inthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroupfivepatients(8.3%)switchedto(hypo)mania(2(3.3%)inthefirstphaseand3(5%)inthesecondphase).Twoofthem(3.3%)hadalsoreachedtheresponsecriterionfordepression(table3).

TimetrendinMADRSscoreper2weeks PredictedMADRSscore

Phase1:0-8weeks

Phase2:8-16weeks

Differencebetweenphases

P-value(testbetweenphases) Atweek8 Atweek16

Placebogroup -2.68(0.31) -1.39(0.31) 1.29(0.52) 0.015 17.5(15.1to19.9) 11.9(9.4to14.5)

Lamotriginegroup -3.81(0.30) -0.82(0.30) 2.99(0.51) <0.0005 13.0(10.7to15.3) 9.7(7.2to12.2)

Differencebetweengroups

-1.12(0.42) 0.57(0.43) –4.5(–7.8to–1.2) –2.2(–5.8to1.3)

P-value(testbetweengroups)

0.009 0.19 0.009 0.22

87

4


Safety

Overall16weeksofthestudy,therewere15seriousadverseevents(SAE)involvingeightpatientsinthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinegroup(onepatientexperiencedtwoSAEs)andfivepatientsinthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroup(alsoonepatientwithtwoSAEs).ThefourSAEsoccurringduringthefirstphasehavebeenreportedbefore(15).Duringthesecondphasetherewere11SAEsinvolvingninepatients.Inthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinegrouptwopatients(noadditionofparoxetine)developedamanicepisode,onepatientattemptedsuicide(noadditionofparoxetine),onepatientreceivingparoxetineadditiondevelopedseveresuicidalideation,andonepatientwithhighbloodpressureinthefirstphasehadanatrialflutterinthesecondphase(noparoxetineaddition).Inthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegrouptwopatients(noparoxetineaddition)becameseverelydepressed,onepatienthadaninfectionoftheurinarytract(noparoxetineaddition),onepatientwiththeadditionofparoxetinewasadmittedtoapsychiatrichospital(reasonunknown)withco-occurringhyperthyroidism(secondphase).Allpatientsrecovered.Oftheadverseeventsonlytremorshowedadifferencebetweenthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetineandthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroup(23.4%vs.5%P=0.042)(table5).

88 Chapter 488

Table 5. Adverseeventsoccurringin≥5%ofpatientsinanygroup(linear-by-linearassociation,twosided)

Boldvaluesindicatesignificantlevels<0.05

Lamotrigine(n=64)

Placebo(n=60)

PN % N %Sexproblems 1 1.6 5 8.3 .106Pulmonaryproblems 4 6.3 0 0 .120Blurredvision 4 6.3 2 3.3 .746Hallucinations 4 6.3 0 0 .120Throatproblems 3 4.7 3 5.0 1.000Headache 32 50.0 18 30.0 .338Obstipation 7 10.9 1 1.7 .179Diarhea 4 6.3 2 3.3 .746Alopecia 4 6.3 1 1.7 .366Fatigue 13 20.3 12 20.0 1.000Nausea 20 31.3 11 18.3 .209Flu-likesymptoms 13 20.3 10 16.7 .728Insomnia 11 17.2 4 6.7 .105Tremor 15 23.4 3 5.0 .042

Skinproblems/mildrash 9 14.1 4 6.7 .426Dizziness 5 7.8 7 11.7 .590Abdominalpain 6 9.4 4 6.7 .493Rash 5 7.8 4 6.7 1.000Joint/musclepain 8 12.5 9 15.0 .843Backpain 6 9.4 5 8.3 1.000Coordinationproblems 4 6.3 0 0 .245Eyeproblems 5 7.8 0 0 .120Polyuria 1 1.6 3 5.0 .488Agitation 1 1.6 5 8.3 .169

89

4


Discussion

Althoughthetermtreatmentresistantishardlyoperationalized(18)inbipolardepression,inclinicalpractice‘break-throughdepressions’duringlong-termtreatmentincludinglithium,aremoretherulethantheexception.Thereisadiscrepancybetweenthehighproportionofpatientsreceivingpolypharmacy(byoneestimate80%ofpatientswithbipolardisorder)(19,20)andthescarcenessofresearchdataontheefficacyofpolypharmacy.Toourknowledge,thisisthefirststudyinbipolardisorderinwhichtwodifferenttreatmentalgorithmsconsistingofthreestepswerecompared.Patientswhodevelopedadepressiverelapseorrecurrence(break-throughdepression)duringlong-termlithiumtreatment(thefirststep)receivedadditionoflamotrigineorplaceboasasecondstep(firstphaseofthestudy)for8weeks.Inthethirdstep,non-respondersafterthesecondstepwereofferedfurtheradditionofparoxetineduringanother8weeks(secondphaseofthestudy).Attheendofthesecondstep(week8)therewasaclinicallyandstatisticallysignificantadvantageofchangeinMADRSscoresfrombaseline(theprimaryoutcomecriterion)andonseveralsecondaryoutcomesinfavoroftheadditionoflamotriginecomparedwiththeadditionofplacebo.However,bytheendofthethirdstep(week16)therewerenosignificantdifferencesbetweenthetwotreatmentalgorithmsonprimaryorsecondaryoutcomes.Wehavethreepossibleexplanationsfortheseresults.First,andinourviewmostlikely,theadditionofparoxetineinthethirdstepwasmorebeneficialtopatientsreceivingadditionofplacebointhesecondstepthanitwasforpatientswhohadreceivedadditionoflamotrigine,allowingtheformergroupto‘catchup’toatleastsomeextentwiththelattergroup.Whereasthelamotriginegrouphadplateauedalreadybyweek8–10,theplacebogrouphadmoreroomforimprovement.Inthelamotriginegroup,allpatientsstartedapotentiallyeffectiveadd-ontreatment(lamotrigine)frombaseline,whileintheplacebogroupthenonresponderstolithiumplusplacebostartedapotentiallyeffectiveadd-ontreatment(paroxetine)atweek8.Indeed,asub-analysisshowedagreatereffectofparoxetineinthenon-responderstoplacebothaninthenon-responderstolamotrigine(table4).Aninterestingfinding

90 Chapter 490

inthisrespectisalsothatthesignificancelevelbetweenlamotrigineandplacebowhichwaspresentatweek8,wasevengreateratweek10.Apparently,the‘catchup’effectofparoxetine(intheplacebogroup)occurredafterthefirst2weeksofitsaddition.ThemajorobjectionagainstthisexplanationisthatthereismoreevidenceagainstratherthaninfavoroftheefficacyofparoxetineorotherSSRIsinbipolardepression(9,12,13).Asecondpossibleexplanationfortheseresultsmaybethattheyareareflectionofthenaturalwaxingandwaningcourseofbipolardisorder.However,weconsiderthisasunlikelygiventherelativeshortperiod(week12–16)duringwhichthedifferenceexistingatweek8(andevenmorestronglyatweek10)receded,butithasbeenreportedthatplaceboresponsemayincreaseovertimeinbipolardisorder(21).Athirdpossibleexplanationcouldbethatanadd-onstudydesignreducesthepossibilitytoshowsignificantresults,andthisproblemmayevenincreasewithmultipleadd-onsteps(21).Wedoubthoweverthatthisistheexplanationasthesignificancelevelwasatitsmaximumatweek10,i.e.evenaftermostpatientswhodroppedoutafterthefirstphase,hadalreadyleftthestudy.Inadditiontotheongoingdebateconcerningtheefficacyofantidepressantsinbipolardepression(9,12,22,23),itisinterestingtofurtherhighlightthepossibleefficacyoftheadditionofparoxetineinnon-responderstolithiumplusplacebointhesecondphaseofthestudy.Itisremarkablethatthissuggestionforefficacyofparoxetinewasonlyfoundinpatientswhohadreceivedlithiumplusplacebo,andnotinthepatientswhohadalreadyreceivedlithiumpluslamotrigine.Weconsideritunlikelythatthisresponsetoparoxetinewasaplaceboeffectasallpatientshadalreadyreceivedplacebointhefirstphase.Perhapsparoxetineiseffectiveinpatientswithabreak-throughdepressionduringlong-termtreatmentwithlithium,butnotinpatientsalsoreceivingvariousotherdrugs,suchaslamotrigine(asshowninourstudy)ortreatmentsotherthanlithium,suchasvalproate,carbamazepine,atypicalantipsychoticsand⁄oradditionalpsychotherapy(asintheSTEP-BDadd-onstudyoftheefficacyofadd-ontreatmentwithantidepressantsincludingtheSSRIsertraline)(12)Tofindananswertothisquestion,onemightconsiderathree-armRCTcomparingtheadditionofbothlamotrigineandparoxetinewithplaceboinpatientswithabreak-throughdepressionduringtreatmentwithlithium.

91

4


Overallthetoleranceofthecombinationoflithiumwithlamotrigine(orplacebo)andsubsequentlyparoxetinewasverywell.Oftheoriginalsampleof124patients,76patients(61.3%)completedbothstudy-phases,whilesevenpatients(10.9%)inthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinegroupand5(8.3%)inthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroupdroppedoutasaresultofadverseevents.Exceptforonepatientwhowaslosttofollow-up,allpatientswithSAEsrecovereduneventfully.RegardingSAEstherewasnostatisticaldifferencebetweenthelithium-lamotrigineparoxetinegroupandthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroup.ItisdifficulttodiscernwhethersomeoftheSAEs(e.g.suicidalideation,mania)wereaneffectofthetreatmentorpartofthenaturalcourseoftheillness,butarelationshiptodrugtreatmentcannotberuledout.Onlytremorwasreportedmorefrequentlyinthelithium-lamotrigine-paroxetinegroupthaninthelithium-placebo-paroxetinegroup. Amajorlimitationofthestudywastheoverallrelativelylimitedsamplesize,andmorespecificallytherelativesmallnumberofpatientsmovingfromphase1tophase2.Withthesignificantdifferenceafterphase1butnotafterphase2,wecannotconcludethatthealgorithmwithlamotrigineisonlyeffectiveat8weeksandnotaftertheadditionofparoxetineat16weeks.Itremainspossiblethatwithalargersamplesize,thedifferencewouldalsohavebecamesignificantatweek16.Moreover,asaconsequenceofthedesignwithopenlabeladditionofparoxetine,thestudywasnotcapableofmeasuringtheindividualcontributionofparoxetineinthetreatmentofbipolardepressioninpatientsnotrespondingtolithiumpluslamotrigineorlithiumplusplacebo.Toevaluatetheefficacyofparoxetine,itwouldhavebeennecessarytocompareitwithplaceboandtore-randomizepatientsafterphase1.However,forsuchastudythesamplesizeofourtrialwasmuchtoosmall.Finally,thedurationofthisstudy,althoughlongbycurrentclinicaltrialstandards,doesnotprovidedatahowtocontinuefurthertreatmentinresponders.Thiswillbeaddressedinanotherpaperinwhichwewilldescribetheresultsofa1yearfollow-upinrespondersofbothphase1andphase2. Inconclusion,thepresentresultsshowsthatinpatientswithabreak-throughdepressionduringlong-termtreatmentwithlithium,theadditionof

92 Chapter 492

lamotrigineiseffective(firstphaseofthisstudy)whilefurtheradditionofparoxetineinnonresponderstolamotrigine(secondphase)doesnotappeartoprovidemuchextrabenefit.Ontheotherhand,thefindingfromthesecondphaseofanincreasedresponsetoparoxetineinnonresponderstotheadditionofplacebosupportsthenotionthattheadditionofparoxetine,andperhapsotherSSRIs,maybereasonablechoicesforthetreatmentofpatientswithabipolardepressiondespitetreatmentwithlithium.Clearlymorestudiesemployingdifferenttreatmentalgorithmsareneededtohelpdiscernthemostoptimalformsofpolypharmacyforbipolardisorder.

93

4


References

1. SpornJ,SachsG.Theanticonvulsantlamotrigineintreatment-resistantmanic-depressiveillness.JClinPsychopharmacol1997;17:185–189.

2. KusumakarV,YathamLN.Anopenstudyoflamotrigineinrefractorybipolardepression.PsychiatryRes1997;72:145–148.

3. CalabreseJR,FatemiSH,WoyshvilleMJ.Antidepressanteffectsoflamotrigineinrapidcyclingbipolardisorder.AmJPsychiatry1996;153:1236.

4. HamiltonM.Aratingscalefordepression.JNeurolNeurosurgPsychiatry1960;23:56–62.

5. CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGS,AscherJA,MonaghanE,RuddGD.Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup.JClinPsychiatry1999;60:79–88.

6. MontgomerySA,ÅsbergM.Anewdepressionscaledesignedtobesensitivetochange.BrJPsychiatry1979;134:382–389.

7. CalabreseJR,HuffmanRF,WhiteRLetal.Lamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:resultsoffivedouble-blind,placebo-controlledclinicaltrials.BipolarDisord2008;10:323–333.

8. GeddesJ,HuffmanRF,PaskaW,EvoniukG,LeadbetterR.Lamotrigineforacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:additionalclinicaltrialdataandaretrospectivepooledanalysisofresponseratesacrossallrandomizedtrialsconductedbyGSK.BipolarDisord2007;8(Suppl.1):32.

9. NemeroffCB,EvansDL,GyulaiLetal.Double-blind,placebo-controlledcomparisonofimipramineandparoxetineinthetreatmentofbipolardepression.AmJPsychiatry2001;158:906–912.

10. SheltonRC,StahlSM.Risperidoneandparoxetinegivensinglyandincombinationforbipolardepression.JClinPsychiatry2004;65:1715–1719.

11. VietaE,Martinez-AranA,GoikoleaJMetal.Arandomizedtrialcomparingparoxetineandvenlafaxineinthetreatmentofbipolardepressedpatientstakingmoodstabilizers.JClinPsychiatry2002;63:508–512.

94 Chapter 494

12. SachsGS,NierenbergAA,CalabreseJRetal.Effectivenessofadjunctiveantidepressanttreatmentforbipolardepression.NEnglJMed2007;356:1711–1722.

13.McElroySL,ChangW,NordenhemA,PaulssonB,BrecherM,YoungAH.Adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudywithacuteandcontinuationphaseofquetiapineinadultswithbipolardepression(emboldenII).27-1-2008.3rdbiennialconferenceoftheinternationalsocietyforbipolardisorders.Delhi,India27–28January2008.

14.GoodwinGM,AndersonI,ArangoCetal.ECNPconsensusmeeting.Bipolardepression.Nice,March2007.EurNeuropsychopharmacol2008;18:535–549.

15. vanderLoosML,MulderPG,HartongEGetal.Efficacyandsafetyoflamotrigineasadd-ontreatmenttolithiuminbipolardepression:amulticenter,double-blind,placebocontrolledtrial.JClinPsychiatry2009;70:223–231.

16. SheehanDV,LecrubierY,SheehanKHetal.TheMini-International NeuropsychiatricInterview(M.I.N.I.):thedevelopmentandvalidationofastructureddiagnosticpsychiatricinterviewforDSM-IVandICD-10.JClinPsychiatry1998;59(Suppl.20):22–33.

17. SpearingMK,PostRM,LeverichG,BrandtD,NolenWA.Modificationoftheclinicalglobalimpressions(CGI)scaleforuseinbipolarillness(BP):theCGI-BP.PsychiatryRes1997;73:159–171.

18. PacchiarottiI,MazzariniL,ColomFetal.Treatmentresistantbipolardepression:towardsanewdefinition.ActaPsychiatrScand2009;120:429–440.

19.GhaemiSN,HsuDJ,ThaseMEetal.Pharmacologicaltreatmentpatternsatstudyentryforthefirst500STEPBDparticipants.PsychiatrServ2006;57:660–665.

20. SimonNM,OttoMW,WeissRDetal.Pharmacotherapyforbipolardisorderandcomorbidconditions:baselinedatafromSTEP-BD.JClinPsychopharmacol2004;24:512–520.

21. VietaE,CarneX.Theuseofplaceboinclinicaltrialsonbipolardisorder:anewapproachforanolddebate.PsychotherPsychosom2005;74:10–16.

22.GijsmanHJ,GeddesJR,RendellJM,NolenWA,GoodwinGM.Antidepressantsforbipolardepression:asystematicreviewofrandomized,controlledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004;161:1537–1547.

95

4


23. LichtRW,GijsmanH,NolenWA,AngstJ.Areantidepressantssafeinthetreatmentofbipolardepression?AcriticalevaluationoftheirpotentialrisktoinduceswitchintomaniaorcycleaccelerationActaPsychiatrScand2008;118:337–346.

97

5

MarcLMvanderLoosa,PaulMulderb,ErwinGThMHartongc,MarcBJBlomd,AntonCVergouwene,MartijnSvanNoordenf,ManuelaATimmermansg,EduardVietahandWillemANolenifortheLamLitStudyGroup*

aDepartmentofPsychiatry,IsalaKliniekenLocationSophia,Zwolle,bDepartmentofBiostatistics,ErasmusUniversityMedicalCenter,Rotterdam,cDepartmentofPsychiatry,Canisius-WilhelminaHospital,Nijmegen,dParnassiaPsychiatricInstitute,TheHague,eDepartmentofPsychiatry,SintLucasAndreasHospital,Amsterdam,fDepartmentofPsychiatry,LeidenUniversityMedicalCenter,Leiden,gPraktijkondersteuningZuidOostBrabant,Veldhoven,TheNetherlands,hBipolarDisordersProgram,CIBERSAMInstituteofNeuroscience,HospitalClinic,UniversityofBarcelona,IDIBAPS,Barcelona,Catalonia,Spain,iDepartmentofPsychiatry,UniversityMedicalCenterGroningen,UniversityofGroningen,Groningen,TheNetherlands

Bipolar Disord 2011: 13: 111–117.© 2011

Long-term outcome of bipolar depressed patients receiving lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a novel design

98 Chapter 598

Abstract

Objective:Intwopreviousmanuscripts,wedescribedtheefficacyoflamotrigineversusplaceboasadd-ontolithium(followedbytheadditionofparoxetineinnonresponders)intheshort-termtreatmentofbipolardepression.Inthispaperwedescribethelong-term(68weeks)outcomeofthatstudy. Methods:Atotalof124bipolardepressedpatientsreceivinglithiumwererandomizedtoadditionoflamotrigineorplacebo.Aftereightweeks,paroxetinewasaddedtononrespondersforanothereightweeks.Responderscontinuedmedicationandwerefollowedforupto68weeksoruntilarelapseorrecurrenceofadepressiveormanicepisode. Results:Aftereightweeks,theadditionoflamotriginetolithiumwassignificantlymoreefficaciousthanadditionofplacebo,whileafteradditionofparoxetineinnonrespondersbothgroupsfurtherimprovedwithnosignificantdifferencebetweengroupsatweek16.Duringfollow-uptheefficacyoflamotriginewasmaintained:timetorelapseorrecurrencewaslongerforthelamotriginegroup(mediantime10.0months(confidenceinterval:1.1–18.8)versustheplacebogroup3.5months(confidenceinterval:0.7–7.0)). Conclusion:Inpatientswithbipolardepression,despitecontinueduseoflithium,additionoflamotriginerevealedacontinuedbenefitcomparedtoplacebothroughouttheentirestudy.

99

5

Long-term outcome of bipolar depressed patients receiving lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a novel design 99

Introduction

Bipolardisordersarecharacterizedbyrecurrentmoodepisodes.While98%ofpatientsachievesyndromaticrecoveryfromanacutemanicordepressiveepisodewithintwoyears(1),80–90%ofpatientssufferfromnewepisodesthereafter(1–3).Despitetheuseofmoodstabilizerssuchaslithiumorvalproate,especiallydepressiveepisodesanddayswithdepressivesymptomsarefrequentandmayprovedifficulttotreat(2,4,5).Lithiumandperhapstoalesserextentvalproatehavesomebutlimitedefficacyinthetreatmentandpreventionofdepressiveepisodes(6–8).Thereisacontroversyregardingtheuseofantidepressants,bothinthetreatmentofacutedepressiveepisodes(9,10)aswellasinlong-termtreatmentofbipolardisorder(11–13).Oftheatypicalantipsychotics,onlyquetiapine(14–17)andolanzapine(especiallyincombinationwithfluoxetine)(18)demonstratedefficacyinacutebipolardepression.Moreover,olanzapine(19)andquetiapine(asadd-ontolithiumorvalproate)(20,21)werefoundeffectiveinthepreventionofdepressiverecurrences. Anothertreatmentoptionforbipolardepressionislamotrigine.Theresultsfromtheacutestudiesinbipolardepressionarecontradictory.Thefirstrandomized,controlledtrial(RCT)foundasignificantdifferencebetweenlamotrigineandplaceboinfavouroflamotrigine,althoughonlyonsecondaryoutcomemeasures(22).FouradditionalRCTsthereafterfoundnodifferencebetweenlamotriginemonotherapyandplacebo,probablybecauseofahighplaceboresponseinthesestudies(23,24).Nevertheless,inameta-analysisofallfivestudies,lamotriginewasmoreeffectivethanplacebo(25).Inaddition,lamotriginehasbeencomparedwithplaceboandlithiuminlong-termtreatmentofbipolardisorder. Intwostudies(26,27)lamotriginewasfoundeffectiveinpreventingdepressiverecurrences,whilelithiumwaseffectiveinpreventingmanicrecurrences. Intwopreviouspapers,wedescribedtheshort-termresultsofaplacebo-controlledRCTinvestigatingtheeffectsoftheadditionoflamotriginetolithium

100 Chapter 5100

inpatientswithbipolardepressiondespitelong-termtreatmentwithlithium.Inthefirstphaseofthatstudy(weeks1–8),lamotriginewasfoundtobemoreeffectivethanplacebo(28);inthesecondphase(weeks9–16),furtheradditionofparoxetineinnonresponderstoeitherlamotrigineorplacebo(pluslithium)wasassociatedwithfurtherimprovementinbothgroups,whilethedifferencebetweenlamotrigineandplacebowasnolongersignificantatweek16(29).Inthispaper,wedescribetheresultsofthelong-termoutcomeofthatstudy.

Methods

Study design Inthispaper,wedescribethefollow-upofaninvestigator(WAN)-initiated,randomized,double-blind,placebo-controlledtrialwiththreephases.Thedesignofthestudyisshowninfigure1andhasbeendescribedindetailelsewhere(28,29). Duringthefirsteightweeksofthestudy(phase1),124patientswithabipolarIorIIdisorderandadepressiveepisodewith≥18pointsontheMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS)(30)despitelong-termtreatmentwithlithiumreceivedlamotrigineorplaceboinadditiontoongoingtreatmentwithlithium(28).Non-responders(n=37)totheadditionofeitherlamotrigineorplaceboatweek8wereofferedtheopportunitytoreceivefurtheradditionofparoxetine(openlabel)incombinationwithongoinglithiumpluslamotrigineorplaceboduringweeks9–16(phase2)(29). Respondersat8or16weekswerefolloweduntilmaximallyweek68(phase3)oruntiltheyreachedtheprimaryendpoint(adepressiveormanicrelapseorrecurrence).Themedicationregime(lithium,double-blindlamotrigineorplacebo,andinsomepatientsparoxetineaswell)waskeptstableduringtheentirefollow-up.Patientswholeftthestudywithoutarelapseorrecurrencewereconsidereddropouts;reasonsfordropoutwererecorded. ThestudywasapprovedbytheethicalreviewboardoftheUniversityMedicalCenterUtrecht,TheNetherlands,andbylocalinstitutionalreviewboardsinbothcountries.Allpatientsgavewritteninformedconsentpriortoinitiationofanystudyprocedure.

101

5


Figure 1. Designofthestudy

Treatments Allpatientswerealreadyreceivinglithium,whichwasmaintainedataplasmalevelof0.6–1.2mmol⁄Lthroughoutthestudy.Duringphase1,lamotrigine(orplaceboinidenticaltablets)wasup-titratedto200mg⁄dayatweek6andmaintainedatthisdosethroughoutthestudy.Innonresponders,atweek8paroxetinewasstartedat20mg⁄dayandalsomaintainedatthisdosethroughoutthestudy.Inadditiontothestudymedication(lithium,lamotrigineorplacebo,andparoxetine)patientswerenotallowedtotakeotherpsychotropicdrugs,withtheexceptionofbenzodiazepinesatamaximumof2mglorazepamequivalents⁄day.

Assessments and outcome measures Afterbaseline,patientswereseeneverytwoweeksuntiltheendofphase2(week16).Duringfollowup(phase3),patientswereassessedatweek20andthereaftereverytwomonths.Duringallvisits,patientswerescoredontheMADRSandtheClinicalGlobalImpression–Bipolarversion(CGIBP)(31);adverseevents

Lithium+Lamotrigine+Paroxetineinnon-reponders

Lithium

Lithium

Lithium

+Lamotrigine

+Placebo

Phase 1 Phase 2 Follow-up of respondersPhase 3

Lithium+Placebo+Paroxetineinnon-responders

Week 0 8 16 68

Responders

102 Chapter 5102

andstudymedicationcompliancewerealsoassessed.Lithiumplasmalevelsweremeasuredeveryfourmonths. Responseduringphase1and2leadingtofollow-upwasdefinedasascoreof1or2(verymuchormuchimproved)accordingtotheCGI-BPimprovementofdepressionscale.Outcomeofthestudywastherelapseorrecurrenceofamanicordepressiveepisodedefinedasascore≥4(atleastmoderatesymptoms)ontheCGI-BPseverityofdepressionormaniascale.Inaddition,itwasinvestigatedhowlongtheMADRSscorewasmaintainedat<50%ofitsbaselinevalueafterpatientsreachedthislevelforthefirsttimeduringphase1or2.

Statistics Allanalysesconcerningefficacyduringfollow-up(phase3)havetobeconsideredinadescriptivesensewithoutstatisticaltesting.Thisisbecausethegroupsenteringfollow-upwereselectedbythetreatment-dependentoutcome(very)muchimprovementofdepressionontheCGI-BPandconsequentlyhadbecomeformallyincomparableatthisstage. Theevolutionofnosymptomsoronlymildsymptoms(bothCGI-BPmaniaanddepressionseverityscore<4)duringthewholestudywasdescribedbycalculatingpercentageswithnooronlymildsymptomsoftheoriginalgroupsizesateachvisit.Inaddition,thesustainabilityofaMADRSscore<50%ofbaselineafterthefirstattainmentofthislevelwascomparedbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsusingaKaplan–Meiersurvivalanalysis. Thefrequenciesofthevarioustypesofadverseeventsoccurringinmorethan5%ofthepatientsduringthecontinuationphasewerecomparedbetweenthetwotreatmentgroupsusingachi-squaretrendtest.

Results

Patientcharacteristicsatbaselinearepresentedintable1.Treatmentgroupswerebalancedatbaseline,consideringtheuniformdistributionofp-valuesovertheinterval(0.1).Theflowchartofthestudy,includingreasonsfordroppingoutduringthethreephases,ispresentedinfigure2.

103

5


Table 1. Patientandillnesscharacteristicsatstudyentry

Lamotrigine(n=64)

Placebo(n=60)

Total(n=124) Statistic Value df P-value

Femalegender(n,%) 37 57.8 30 50 67 54.0 Fisher’s - - 0.471

Age(years)(mean,SD) 45.2 12.1 47.6 11.6 46.4 11.9 t-test 1.13 122 0.261

Ilnesscharacteristics

BipolarIdisorder(n,%) 43 67.2 41 68.3 84 67.7 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Rapidcyclingcourse–last12months

12 18.8 4 6.7 16 12.9 Fisher’s - - 0.061

MADRS(mean,SD) 28.25 5.97 28.82 6.24 28.52 6.08 t-test 0.52 122 0.606

CGI-BPdepressionseverity(mean,SD)

4.56 0.64 4.53 0.57 4.55 0.60 ChiSq.trend

0.07 1 0.882


1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 1.03 0.18 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Lithiumplasmalevelatbaseline(mEq)(mean,SD)

0.82 0.16 0.84 0.16 0.83 0.16 t-test 0.48 122 0.634

Previousothertreatmentsforindexdepressiveepisode(n,%)

TCA 6 9.4 4 6.7 10 8.1 Fisher’s - - 0.745

SSRI/SNRI 15 23,4 16 26.7 31 25.0 Fisher’s - - 0.836

MAO-inhibitor 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.353

Antipsychotic,typical 4 6.3 3 5.0 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 1.000

Antipsychotic,atypical 15 23.4 11 18.3 26 21.0 Fisher’s - - 0.317

Valproicacid 5 7.8 2 3.3 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.247

Carbamazepine 1 1.6 3 5.0 4 3.2 Fisher’s - - 0.285

Benzodiazepine 44 68.8 35 58.3 79 63.7 Fisher’s - - 0.154

Other 3 4.7 4 6.7 7 5.6 Fisher’s - - 0.464

MADRS=Montgomery-ÅsbergDespressionRatingScale,CGI-BP=ClinicalGlobalImpressionforBipolarIllnes,TCA=tricyclicantidepressant,SSRI=selectiveserotoninre-uptakeinhibitor,SNRI=serotonin-noradrenalinre-uptakeinhibitor,MAO=monoamineoxidaseinhibitor.

104 Chapter 5104

Randomized:124

Pluslamotrigine:64 Plusplacebo:60

Completed:52 Completed:50

Drop-outs:10Drop-outs:12

Nonresponders:15 Nonresponders:22Responders:37 Responders:28

Drop-outs:6

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:3

Drop-out:3

Drop-outs:3 Drop-outs:2

Drop-outs:2

Drop-out:1

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:2

Plusparoxetine:9 Plusparoxetine:18Continued:34 Continued:26

Completed:8

Responders:5 Responders:8Remainedresponders:29

Remainedresponders:20


Startfollow-up:30 Startfollow-up:25Phase3

Phas

e2

Phas

e1

Figure 2. Flowchartofthestudy

Inphase1,atotalof124patientswererandomizedtolamotrigine(n=64)orplacebo(n=60);102completedthisphase.Aftereightweeks,thedifferenceinchangeofMADRSscore(theprimaryoutcomecriterionduringphase1)wassignificant(15.37versus11.16,respectivelyp=0.029)(28).

Inphase2,nonresponderstolamotrigine(n=9)orplacebo(n=18)receivedadditionofparoxetine(phase2).Attheendofphase2,bothgroupswerefurtherimproved,whilethedifferencebetweengroupsinchangeofMADRSscorewasnolongersignificant(17.91forthelithium–lamotrigine–paroxetinealgorithmversus15.40(p=0.253)forthelithium–placebo–paroxetinealgorithm)(29).

105

5


Lithiumplasmalevelsweremeasuredatbaselineandatweeks8,16,32,48,and64.Theoverallvariationinmeanplasmalevelswas0.73–0.82mmol⁄Lforthelamotriginegroupversus0.72–0.83mmol⁄Lfortheplacebogroup.

Long-term efficacy Responders,accordingtotheCGI-BP,duringeitherphase1orphase2wereeligibleforfollowup.Ateachvisitduringfollow-up,thenumberofpatientswhomaintainedresponderstatus(CGIBPseverityofdepressionormaniascore<4)wascalculatedaspercentageofthegroupwhostartedwitheitherlamotrigineorplaceboinphase1.Thesepercentagesmaintainedhigherlevelsinthelamotriginegroupthanintheplacebogroupthroughoutthestudy(fig3).Noformalstatisticaltestwasdoneherebecauseoftheselectedgroupforfollow-up(seeMethods).Thedropinpercentagebetweenweeks16and20iscausedbythetreatment-dependentselectionofpatientsenteringfollow-up. WealsocalculatedtimetofirstrelapseorrecurrencebasedontheMADRSscoreafterhavingachievedresponderstatusaccordingtotheMADRS(i.e.,<50%ofbaseline)forthefirsttimeduringphase1orphase2.Inthisanalysis,patientswholeftthestudyforanyreasonwerecensored. Thetimetorelapseorrecurrencewaslongerforthelamotriginegroupthanfortheplacebogroup:mediantime10.0months(95%confidenceinterval(CI):1.1–18.8)versus3.5months(95%CI:0.7–7.0),respectively(seefig4).Noformalstatisticaltestwasperformed. Attheendofthestudy(68weeks),18patients(28.1%)fromthelamotriginegroupwerestillinthestudyversus14patientsfromtheplacebogroup(23.3%).

106 Chapter 5106

Figure 3. Responders(ClinicalGlobalImpression–Bipolarversionimprovementofdepressionscoreof1or2)aspercentageoftheinitialgroup(n=124;lamotriginen=64,placebon=60)throughoutallthreephasesofthestudy.

Weeks

Perc

enta

gere

spon

ders

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68

107

5


Figure 4. Probabilityofmaintainingresponse(score<50%ofMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS)scoreatbaseline)withoutrecurrence(score≥50%ofinitialMADRS)afterhavingachievedresponderstatusforthefirsttimeduringphase1orphase2.Mediantimetorelapseorrecurrenceforthelamotriginegroupwas10.0months(95%confidenceinterval:1.1–18.8)versus3.5months(95%confidenceinterval:0.7–7.0)fortheplacebogroup.

Safety

Occurrenceofsevereadverseevents(SAEs)andanyadverseevents(AEs)duringthefirst16weeksofthisstudyweredescribedindetailpreviously(28,29).Duringfollow-up,5SAEswereobserved:2inthelamotriginegroup(1patientdevelopedanatrialflutterand1hadhighbloodpressure),and3intheplacebogroup(2patientshadaseveredepressiverecurrenceand1anurinarytractinfection).NoneoftheSAEswereconsideredtoberelatedtostudymedicationandallpatientsrecovered.TheAEsoccurringinmorethan5%ofanygrouparelistedintable2.Therewasnodifferencebetweenlamotrigineandplacebointhepreva-lenceofanyAE.ThetotalamountofAEsinbothgroupswasremarkablylowfora68-weekfollow-up.

Months

Prob

abili

tyo

fno

recu

rrenc

e

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 3 6 9 12 15 18

108 Chapter 5108

Fivepatientsinthelamotriginegroupand8patientsintheplacebogroupdevelopeda(hypo)manicepisodeduringfollow-up.

Table 2. Adverseeventsoccuringin≥5%ofpatientsinanygroup(linear-by-linearassociation,two-sided)

Discussion

Inthispaper,wedescribethelong-termfollow-upofanRCTconsistingofthreephases.Withthisquitenoveldesignwewereabletocomparetwodifferenttreatmentalgorithms,onewithlamotrigineaddedtolithiumandonewithplaceboaddedtolithium(phase1),bothfollowedbyadditionofparoxetineinnonresponders(phase2)andasubsequentfollow-upinrespondersafterphase1or2(phase3).Wefoundthatthealgorithmwithlamotrigineadditionwasnotonlymoreeffectivethanthealgorithmwithplaceboadditionintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepressionbutalsoappearedtoretainitsefficacythroughouttheentirestudy.Thepercentageofrespondersaswellasthetimetorelapseafter

Lamotrigine(n=30)

Placebo(n=25)

PN % N %Pulmonaryproblems 3 10.0 0 0 .242Blurredvision 2 6.7 0 0 .495Hallucinations 2 6.7 0 0 .495Throatproblems 3 10.0 2 8.0 .383Joint/musclepain 2 6.7 3 12.0 .1000Headache 3 10.0 2 8.0 .383Nausea 4 13.3 1 4.0 .301Flu-likesymptoms 3 10.0 1 4.0 .492Insomnia 3 10.0 2 8.0 .745Abdominalpain 3 10.0 0 0 .242Hypertension 2 6.7 0 0 .495Backpain 1 3.3 2 8.0 .585Coordinationproblems 2 6.7 0 0 .495Eyeproblems 2 6.7 0 0 .495

109

5


initialresponsewasfavourableforthelamotriginegroupversustheplacebogroup. Inouropinion,thedesignofourstudyhasseveraladvantagesanddisadvantages.Thefirstadvantageisthattheadd-ondesigncloselyresemblesreallife,inwhichmanybipolardisorderpatientsreceivemultiplemedicationsratherthanmonotherapy(32–34).InadditiontotheusualdesignofanRCTcomparinglamotrigineorplaceboaddedtolithium,wealsocouldprovidedataontheadditionofathirddrug(paroxetine)tolithiumandlamotrigine(orplacebo)andonthelong-termfollow-up.Thus,ourstudyprovidesusefulinformationontheefficacyandsafetyofadjunctivelamotriginecomparedtoplacebointheacuteaswellasthelong-termtreatmentofbipolardepression. Asecondadvantageisthatnonrespondersafterphase1couldreceiveactivemedication(paroxetine)inphase2,thusincreasingthefeasibilityofthestudy.Wehypothesizethatitmayalsopartlyexplaintherelativelowdropoutrateinourstudy(only38%duringthefirsttwophasesand74%overtheentirestudyof68weeks),whichismuchlowerthaninthetwopreviouslong-termtrialswithlamotrigine(26,27).Inthesestudies,98%and85%ofthosewhowererandomizedtolamotrigineorplacebo,respectively,weredropoutsafter68weeks. Themaindisadvantageofthisdesignisthattheselectionofnonrespondersforreceivingparoxetineafterphase1andtheselectionofrespondersafterphase1and2forcontinuationofthestudyledtoanunequalnumberofpatientsleavingthestudyatthesedecisionpoints.Thiseventuallyhamperedpossibilitiesforananalysiswithstatisticaltestingoftheresultsofphase3. Themainlimitationofourstudyistherelativelysmallsamplesize.Thiswasalreadyaproblemintheanalysisofphase1,inwhich124patientsparticipatedwhilethestudywasoriginallyplannedtorecruit220patients,anditdefinitelyhamperedstatisticalanalysisafterphase2.Thus,ourfindingsmustbeinterpretedwithsomecaution. Nevertheless,weconcludethatlamotriginewasmoreeffectivethanplaceboasadd-ontreatmenttolithiuminpatientswithbreakthroughbipolar

110 Chapter 5110

depressionandwaswelltoleratedincombinationwithlithium.Moreover,lamotriginecouldsafelybecombinednotonlywithlithiumbutalsowithparoxetineandappearedtoretainitsefficacyandgoodtolerabilitythroughoutfollow-up.

111

5


References

1. TohenM,ZarateCAJr,HennenJetal.TheMcLean-HarvardFirst-EpisodeManiaStudy:predictionofrecoveryandfirstrecurrence.AmJPsychiatry2003;160:2099–2107.

2. KupkaRW,LuckenbaughDA,PostRMetal.Comparisonofrapid-cyclingandnon-rapid-cyclingbipolardisorderbasedonprospectivemoodratingsin539outpatients.AmJPsychiatry2005;162:1273–1280.

3. GoodwinFK,JamisonKR.Courseandoutcome.In:ManicDepressiveIllness;BipolarDisordersandRecurrentDepression,2ndedn.NewYork:OxfordUniversityPress,2007:119–154.

4. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJetal.Thelong-termnaturalhistoryoftheweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2002;59:530–537.

5. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJetal.Aprospectiveinvestigationofthenaturalhistoryofthelong-termweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:261–269.

6. GeddesJR,BurgessS,HawtonK,JamisonK,GoodwinGM.Long-termlithiumtherapyforbipolardisorder:systematicreviewandmeta-analysisofrandomizedcon-trolledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004;161:217–222.

7. BowdenCL,CalabreseJR,McElroySLetal.Arandomized,placebo-controlled12-monthtrialofdivalproexandlithiumintreatmentofoutpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.DivalproexMaintenanceStudyGroup.ArchGenPsychiatry2000;57:481–489.

8. GeddesJR,GoodwinGM,RendellJetal.LithiumplusvalproatecombinationtherapyversusmonotherapyforrelapsepreventioninbipolarIdisorder(BALANCE):arandomisedopen-labeltrial.Lancet2010;375:385–395.

9. GijsmanHJ,GeddesJR,RendellJM,NolenWA,GoodwinGM.Antidepressantsforbipolardepression:asystematicreviewofrandomized,controlledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004;161:1537–1547.

10. SachsGS,NierenbergAA,CalabreseJRetal.Effectivenessofadjunctiveantidepressanttreatmentforbipolardepression.NEnglJMed2007;356:1711–1722.

112 Chapter 5112

11. LichtRW,GijsmanH,NolenWA,AngstJ.Areantidepressantssafeinthetreatmentofbipolardepression?Acriticalevaluationoftheirpotentialrisktoinduceswitchintomaniaorcycleacceleration.ActaPsychiatrScand2008;118:337–346.

12.GhaemiSN,WingoAP,FilkowskiMA,BaldessariniRJ.Long-termantidepressanttreatmentinbipolardisorder:meta-analysesofbenefitsandrisks.ActaPsychiatrScand2008;118:347–356.

13. VietaE.Antidepressantsinbipolardepression.ActaPsychiatrScand2008;118:335–336.

14.CalabreseJR,KeckPEJr,MacfaddenWetal.Arandomized,double-blind,placebo-controlledtrialofquetiapineinthetreatmentofbipolarIorIIdepression.AmJPsychiatry2005;162:1351–1360.

15. ThaseME,MacfaddenW,WeislerRHetal.EfficacyofquetiapinemonotherapyinbipolarIandIIdepression:adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudy(theBOLDERIIstudy).JClinPsychopharmacol2006;26:600–609.

16. YoungAH,McElroySL,BauerMetal.Adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudyofquetiapineandlithiummonotherapyinadultsintheacutephaseofbipolardepression(EMBOLDENI).JClinPsychiatry2010;71:150–162.

17.McElroySL,WeislerRH,ChangWetal.Adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudyofquetiapineandparoxetineasmonotherapyinadultswithbipolardepression(EMBOLDENII).JClinPsychiatry2010;71:163–174.

18. TohenM,VietaE,CalabreseJetal.Efficacyofolanzapineandolanzapine-fluoxetinecombinationinthetreatmentofbipolarIdepression.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:1079–1088.

19. TohenM,CalabreseJR,SachsGSetal.Randomized,placebo-controlledtrialofolanzapineasmaintenancetherapyinpatientswithbipolarIdisorderrespondingtoacutetreatmentwitholanzapine.AmJPsychiatry2006;163:247–256.

20. SuppesT,VietaE,LiuS,BrecherM,PaulssonB.MaintenancetreatmentforpatientswithbipolarIdisorder:resultsfromaNorthAmericanstudyofquetiapineincombinationwithlithiumordivalproex(Trial127).AmJPsychiatry2009;166:476–488.

21. VietaE,SuppesT,EggensI,PerssonI,PaulssonB,BrecherM.Efficacyandsafetyofquetiapineincombina-tionwithlithiumordivalproexformaintenanceofpatientswithbipolarIdisorder(InternationalTrial126).JAffectDisord2008;109:251–263.

113

5


22.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGS,AscherJA,MonaghanE,RuddGD.Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup.JClinPsychiatry1999;60:79–88.

23.CalabreseJR,HuffmanRF,WhiteRLetal.Lamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:resultsoffivedouble-blind,placebo-controlledclinicaltrials.BipolarDisord2008;10:323–333.

24.GeddesJ,HuffmanR,PaskaW,EvoniukG,LeadbetterR.Lamotrigineforacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:additionalclinicaltrialdataandaretrospectivepooledanalysisofresponseratesacrossallrandomizedtrialsconductedbyGSK.BipolarDisord2006;8(Suppl.1):32.

25.GeddesJR,CalabreseJR,GoodwinGM.Lamotriginefortreatmentofbipolardepression:independentmeta-analysisandmeta-regressionofindividualpatientdatafromfiverandomisedtrials.BrJPsychiatry2009;194:4–9.

26. BowdenCL,CalabreseJR,SachsGetal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003;60:392–400.

27.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGetal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlydepressedpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.JClinPsychiatry2003;64:1013–1024.

28. vanderLoosML,MulderPG,HartongEGetal.Efficacyandsafetyoflamotrigineasadd-ontreatmenttolithiuminbipolardepression:amulticenter,double-blind,placebo-controlledtrial.JClinPsychiatry2009;70:223–231.

29. vanderLoosML,MulderP,HartongEGetal.Efficacyandsafetyoftwotreatmentalgorithmsinbipolardepressionconsistingofacombinationoflithium,lamotrigineorplaceboandparoxetine.ActaPsychiatrScand2010;122:246–254.

30.MontgomerySA,ÅsbergM.Anewdepressionscaledesignedtobesensitivetochange.BrJPsychiatry1979;134:382–389.

31. SpearingMK,PostRM,LeverichG,BrandtD,NolenWA.Modificationoftheclinicalglobalimpressions(CGI)scaleforuseinbipolarillness(BP):theCGI-BP.PsychiatryRes1997;73:159–171.

32.GhaemiSN,HsuDJ,ThaseMEetal.Pharmacologicaltreatmentpatternsatstudyentryforthefirst500STEP-BDparticipants.PsychiatrServ2006;57:660–665.

114 Chapter 5114

33. SimonNM,OttoMW,WeissRDetal.Pharmacotherapyforbipolardisorderandcomorbidconditions:baselinedatafromSTEP-BD.JClinPsychopharmacol2004;24:512–520.

34.GoldbergJF,BrooksJOIII,KuritaKetal.Depressiveillnessburdenassociatedwithcomplexpolypharmacyinpatientswithbipolardisorder:findingsfromtheSTEP-BD.JClinPsychiatry2009;70:155–162.

115

5


116116

117

6

Discussion

118 Chapter 6118

Introduction

Bipolardisorderisacommonanddebilitatingdisorderwithalifetimeprevalenceofaround2%(1)Althoughthereisconvincingevidencethatpatientsaremoreoftenandlongerdepressedthanmanic(2-4),therewasuntilrecentlynoapproveddrugforthetreatmentofbipolardepression.Currentlyonlyquetiapine(bothinEuropeendeUS)andthecombinationofolanzapinewithfluoxetine(intheUS)havebeenapprovedfortheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression,whilelamotrigine(bothinEuropeandintheUS)hasbeenapprovedforlong-termtreatment,specificallytopreventdepressiveepisodes. Theunderpinningofexistingguidelines,whichalsoadvocatesothertreatmentsincludingantidepressants,isconfinedduetothefactthatresearchinthisfieldislimited.Aslongasthehigheststandardofevidenceinresearch,i.e.randomizedplacebo-controlledtrials,dependsmostlyonfundingfrompharmaceuticalcompaniesandtherewas,withafewexceptions(seeabove),notmuchinterestamongthesecompaniestoapplyforaspecificindication‘bipolardepression’,thefutureofnewrandomizedcontrolledtrialsinbipolardepressionisbleak(5).Inadditiontotheadd-ontrialwithlamotrigineaspresentedinthisthesisandtheotherlamotriginemonotherapytrials,onlyafewothertreatmentshavebeeninvestigatedindouble-blind,randomizedtrialswithsometimesseveremethodologicalproblems.

Antidepressants

Noneofthemorethan20availableantidepressantshasspecificallybeenstudiedanddevelopedbypharmaceuticalcompaniesfortheindication‘bipolardepression’.Asaresult,thereisanalmostcompletelackof(large)randomizedplacebo-controlledtrialsontheefficacyofantidepressantsasmonotherapyinbipolardepression(6;7).Nextwewillbrieflyreviewavailableevidencefromtherandomizedplacebo-controlledtrials. In1980Mendlewiczetal.comparedL-deprenil(MAO-B-inhibitor)incombinationwithL-5-hydroxytryptophantoplaceboin58depressedpatients

119

6

Discussion 119

(bothunipolarandbipolar)(8).Thecombinationoutperformedplaceboinclinicalimprovement. In1982Himmelhochetal.comparedtranylcyprominewithplaceboin59anergicmajordepressedpatients(9).Althoughthepatientswerenotformallydiagnosedasbipolar,theauthorsstatedthat‘anergicmajordepressionmosttypicallyoccursinprimarybipolarillnesses’.Theyreportedthattranylcypromineshowedsuperiorityoverplacebobytheendofthefirstweek,andthisimprovementincreasedinsignificanceateachsuccessivevisituntilweek6. In1989Cohnetal.comparedfluoxetine,imipramineandplaceboina6-weekstudyinvolving89patientsofwhom22werealreadyusinglithium(10).Responsetofluoxetinewasgreaterthantoimipramineorplacebowhileresponsetoimipraminewasalsogreaterthantoplacebo.Duetosmallnumbers,thedifferenceswerehowevernotsignificant. In2001Nemeroffetal.comparedtheadditionofparoxetine,imipramineandplaceboasadditiontolithiumin117bipolardepressedpatients(11).Therewasnosignificantdifferencebetweenthethreegroupsinefficacy.However,inapost-hocanalysisbothantidepressantsweresuperiorinasubgroupwithlithiumbloodserumlevelsbelow0.8mmol/l. In2007Sachsetal.publishedthelargestandperhapsalsomostinfluentialstudyofantidepressantsinbipolardepression:theSTEP-BDstudywithatotalof366patients.(12).Inthisdouble-blindtrialbupropion,paroxetineorplacebowereaddedtoongoingtreatment.Allpatientswereonlithium,valproateoracombinationofthesetwowiththenotionthat27%ofthepatientsreceivedaninadequatedoseoflithiumorvalproate.Later,wheninclusionbecameaproblem,alsootherFDAapprovedantimanicagents(especiallyatypicalantipsychoticssuchasolanzapineandquetiapine)wereallowed.Otherantidepressantshadtobetaperedoffbeforeorduringthefirstweekofthetrial.Othermedicationscouldalsobestartedduringthestudy.Besidesparticipatinginthismedicationtrial69%ofthepatientswereatthesametimeincludedinarandomizedpsychotherapytrialcomparingcognitivebehavioraltherapy,interpersonalpsychotherapyandfamilyfocusedtherapywithpsychoeducation.Themainfindingofthestudyisthattheantidepressantshadnoadditionaleffect

120 Chapter 6120

overplacebo.However,duetothemajorlimitationsitisobviousthatwiththechosendesignthewidelydrawnconclusionfromthisstudythatantidepressantsareineffectiveinbipolardepression,isnotwarranted. In2010McElroyetal.reporteda8weeksstudyinwhichshecompared300mg.and600mgquetiapinetoparoxetine20mg(n=122)andplacebo(n=126)inbipolardepression(13).Bothdosesofquetiapineweremoreefficaciousthanplacebobuttherewasnodifferencebetweenparoxetineandplaceboinresponseorremission. Asaconsequenceofthe(almost)lackofrandomizedplacebo-controlledtrials,andespeciallyofwellpoweredmonotherapytrialswithantidepressants,thereisstillmuchdiscussionabouttheuseofantidepressantsinbipolardepression.Someargueorevenconcludethattheyareineffectiveinbipolardepression(12)whileothersstillconsiderthemas(potential)effective,althoughwithasmallriskofswitchingto(hypo)maniaandcycleaccelerationinsomeantidepressants(14;15).Inaddition,someconsiderthemasunsafeastheycancauseaswitchto(hypo)maniaandcycleacceleration(15),whileothersclaimthatthereisnogoodproofforthis(16).Nevertheless,accordingtoanotherSTEP-BDstudyupto60%ofthebipolarpatientsuseantidepressants(12),whileinyetanotherstudytheusageofantidepressantsinbipolardisorderintheU.S.wasfoundevenhigher:79,33%versus63,57%inEurope(17).

Lithium, valproate and carbamazepine

Althoughlithiumhasbeenthegoldenstandardfortreatmentofbipolardisordersformorethan50years,theproofforefficacyinthetreatmentoftheacutebipolardepressionislimited.In1993areviewof9studieswaspublishedwithatotalof163patients(18).Allstudieswere(mostlypartial)cross-overdesignswithmostlyunknownplasmalevelsoflithiumandwithvariousdurationsofthestudiesupto43days.In8outof9studieslithiumwasreportedtobesuperiortoplacebo.However,duetomethodologicallimitations,thereisnorealproofofefficacyinthesestudies.Subsequently,lithiumhasonlybeencomparedinonestudywithplaceboandquetiapine300mgor600mg/day(19).While

121

6

Discussion 121

bothdosesofquetiapineweremoreefficaciousthanplacebo,lithium(n=136,dosebetween600-1800mg/day)wasnotdifferentfromplacebo(n=129).Inconclusion,thereisnoevidencefortheefficacyoflithiumintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression. Twometa-analysesoffoursmallplacebo-controlledtrialswithvalproateinacutebipolardepression(totaln=142)werepublishedin2010(20;21).Whileinonlyoneoftheseindividualstudiesvalproatewasmoreeffectivethanplacebo,thepooledresultsshowedsuperiorityofvalproateoverplaceboinmeandepressionscoresaswellasinresponserateswithanestimatednumberneededtotreatof5. Carbamazepinewascomparedtoplaceboinonestudy(n=124)withathirdarmwithcarbamazepineincombinationwithaherbalmedicinecalled‘Freeandeasywandererplus’(FEWP)(22).Carbamazepinemonotherapyhadahigherclinicalresponserateatendpointthanplacebo,buttheadditionofFEWPproducedanevenhigherresponseratethancarbamazepinemonotherapy.

Atypical antipsychotics

Thecombinationofolanzapinewithfluoxtinehasbeeninvestigatedin2003byTohen(23).Olanzapinemonotherapywassignificantmoreefficaciousthanplacebobutthecombinationofolanzapinewithfluoxetinewassuperiortoplaceboandtoolanzapinemonotherapy.BasedonthisstudythecombinationbecamethefirstFDAapprovedtreatmentofbipolardepressionintheU.S. Subsequentlyalsoquetiapinehasbeentestedinseveralstudies(13;19;24;25).Inallstudiestherewasarobustdifferencebetweenquetiapineandplaceboinfavorofquetiapine.Nowadaysquetiapinehasbeenapprovedfortheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression(andalsofortheacutetreatmentofmaniaandformaintenancetreatment)intheU.S.andinEurope. Finally,aripiprazolhasbeenstudiedinbipolardepression,butsurprisinglyitwasnotfoundefficaciousincomparisontoplaceboinseveralstudies(7).

122 Chapter 6122

Lamotrigine

Inthisthesiswereportastudyontheefficacyoflamotrigineinthetreatmentofbipolardepression.Whenourstudystartedtheclassicalmoodstabilizerlithiumwasconsideredthegoldstandardinthelong-termtreatmentofbipolardisorderwitha(presumed)strongereffectinthepreventionofmanicepisodesthanofdepressiveepisodes(26).Moreover,theanticonvulsantsvalproateandcarbamazepineappearedtohaveasimilarprofile. Atthesametime,therewassomeevidencethatlamotriginemightbeeffectiveasmonotherapyinthetreatmentofacutebipolardepression(27),whileitalsohadbeenfoundeffectiveaslong-termtreatmentinthepreventionofdepressiveepisodes(28;29).(seealsochapter2)Oneotherstudycomparedlamotrigineandolanzapine/fluoxetine(30):therewasaslightdifferenceinefficacyinfavorofthecombination,butthedrop-outrateduetoadverseeffectswaslowerforlamotrigine.Thisbroughtustothefundamentalideaofourstudy:theadditionoflamotriginetolithiummightprovideabetterefficacyinthetreatmentofacutebipolardepressionandmightprovideagreaterstabilitythereafterduringlong-termfollow-up. Thestudywasdesignedasanadditionstrategycomparablewithtreatmentdecisionsmadeinreallifeclinicalpractice.Weselectedbipolarpatientswhodespitelong-termmaintenancetreatmentwithlithiumhaddevelopedadepressiveepisode.Twodifferenttreatmentalgorithmswerecompared;onetreatmentarmwithadditionoflamotriginetoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumandonetreatmentarmwithadditionofplacebotolithium(phaseI). After8weeksparoxetinewasaddedinnon-respondersinbothgroups(phaseII).Respondersinbothgroupswerefolloweduntilarelapse,arecurrenceoruntilendofstudyat68weeks(phaseIII).

Results Phase I (chapter 3)

Themainfindingofourstudyisagreaterefficacyoftheadditionoflamotriginetolithiumat8weeksthantheadditionofplacebotolithium

123

6

Discussion 123

inpatientswithabipolardepression.Assuch,itisthefirststudytoprovidestatisticalsignificantevidencefortheefficacyoflamotrigineasaddontolithiuminbipolardepressedpatients.Afterfivemonotherapystudieswithonlylimitedpositiveresults,thispositivetrialaddsprovetoanothertreatmentoptioninbipolardepressioninadditiontoquetiapine,olanzapine(especiallyincombinationwithfluoxetine)andtosomeextendtheantidepressants. Thequestionremainswhythistrialhadapositiveoutcomeincontrastwiththepreviousfivemonotherapytrials.Themaindifferencebetweenourstudyandthepreviousstudiesistherelativelowresponserateofplaceboinourstudy(31,7%).Theplaceboresponserateofthefirststudy(whichwaspositiveonsecondaryoutcomecriteria)was29%(27)buttheplaceboresponserateofthefourfollowingstudieswasintherangeof40-50%.(32)Aboutthereasonsforsuchahighplaceboresponsewecanonlyhypothesize.ThepreviousstudieswereallcarriedoutintheU.S.withlotsofpatientswithouthealthinsurance.Forthesepatientseverytreatment,evenanexperimentaltreatment,maybeanimprovementcomparedtoregularcare.Asresponseisoftenrequestedforfurthercontinuationinastudy(andthusreceivingtreatment)theremayalsobeahighpressureonpatientstobecomearesponder.Aseverypatientinourstudyhadaninsurance,suchapressurewasnotthecaseinourpatients,whichmay(inpart?)explainthedifference. Anotherremarkabledifferenceisthemuchlowerdropoutrateinourstudy(17,7%after8weeks)comparedtothepreviousstudies(varyingbetween29%and41%).Apossibleexplanationforthisisthatalmostallourinvestigatorswerealsothetreatingphysiciansofthepatients.This‘personalized’approachmayhaveaddedtothereliabilityandstabilityoftheresults. Afinalreasonmightbethatallourpatientswereusinglithiumandthereforetheywereusedtolaboratorycheckseveryfewmonths.Wehypothesizethatthismayhaveaddedtotreatmentadherencealsofortheothermedications(lamotrigine,placeboandparoxetine)inourstudy.

124 Chapter 6124

Results Phase II (chapter 4)

InphaseIIweadded20mg.paroxetinetoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumandplaceboorlamotrigineinnon-respondersafter8weeks.Althoughbothgroupsimprovedfurtherbetweenweek8and16,thestatisticaldifferencebetweenbothgroupsdisappeared. Thereareafewpossibleexplanationsforthiseffect.FirstthetotalamountofpatientswasfurtherdiminishedduringphaseII.Toremainstatisticalsignificantthedifferenceinoutcomebetweenthetwogroupsshouldhaveincreasedasthenumberofpatientshaddecreased.Giventhetendencyofregressiontothemeanafteralongerperiodoftime,thechanceforsuchanoutcomewassmall. Anotherexplanationisthatithastodowithanantidepressanteffectofparoxetineinthesebipolarpatients.Asthereweremorenon-respondersintheplacebogroupafter8weeks,moreplacebopatientsreceivedparoxetineinphaseII,resultingina‘catchup’ofthenon-respondersintheplacebogroup.However,thisdoesnottakeintoaccountthatpreviousstudieswithparoxetinedidnotfoundparoxetineeffectiveinbipolardepression(11-13).

Results Phase III (chapter 5)

After16weeksallpatientswhowerestillonlithiumwithadditionoflamotrigineorplaceboduringphaseIandwiththepartialadditionofparoxetineinphaseIIandwhohadreachedresponderstatusatweek16,remainedinthestudyandwerefolloweduntilamanicordepressiverelapseoruntiltheendofthestudyat68weeks. Overall68weeksthedifferencebetweenthetreatmentalgorithmwithlamotrigineversusthetreatmentalgorithmwithplaceboappearedtoremainstable.Survivalwithoutrelapseorrecurrencewaslongerforthealgorithmwithlamotriginethanforthealgorithmwithplacebo.Moreover,throughoutthestudytolerabilityingeneralwasgoodasreflectedbyalowdrop-outrateduetoadverseeffectsandtheoveralllowamountofseriousandnon-seriousadverseevents.

125

6

Discussion 125

Design of the study: advantages and disadvantages

Thedesignofourstudyhadadvantagesanddisadvantages.Themainadvantageofthisstudyisthecomparabilitywithclinicalpracticeinwhichmanypatientswithbipolardisorderreceivecombinationtherapyratherthanmonotherapy.Therefore,theresultsappearapplicabletoreallifepatients.Moreover,weconsideradesignwithaplaceboarmduringthefirst8weeks(phaseI)followedbytheadditionofanactivetreatmenttonon-responderstoeithertheinvestigationaldrugorplaceboduringthefollowing8weeks(phaseII),anadvantagefortheparticipatingpatients,resultinginagreaterchancetoobtaininformedconsentfrompatientstoparticipateinatrialinwhichtheyhaveachancetoreceiveplacebo.Nevertheless,inclusionwasaproblemandthenumberof124includedpatientswaslowerthantheoriginallyplanned220patients.Thislimitedthepowerofthestudy. Disadvantages/limitationsofthedesignarethatwedidnotrandomizeagainatweek8(afterphaseI),thatnotallpatientsparticipatedinphaseIIandthatnotallpatientsenteredfollow-upafterweek16(phaseIII)whichseriouslyhamperedthepossibilitiesforformalstatisticaltesting.Therefore,wehadtousedescriptivestatisticsfortheanalysisofthefollow-upperiod. Nevertheless,weconcludethatwehaveprovedthefeasibilityofperformingaplacebo-controlledeffectivenessstudywithmultipleadditionsandalongfollow-up.Inouropinion,thisopensthewaytootheradditiontrials.

Clinical implications

Aspolypharmacyisthemainstayinthetreatmentofbipolardisorder,weconsidertheresultsofourstudyclinicallyimportantasweprovedthattheadditionoflamotriginetolithiumisindeedanoptioninthetreatmentofbipolardepressedpatients:itwasnotonlyfoundeffectiveasacutetreatmentbutalsoappearedtosustainit’sefficacyduringfollowup.Sofartheapprovedarmoryforthetreatmentofbipolardepressionwaslimitedtoquetiapine,olanzapinein

126 Chapter 6126

combinationwithfluoxteineandlamotrigine(forlong-termtreatment).Besideslithium,valproateandantidepressantsmightbeconsideredaspotentialoptions.Whentheresultsofourstudywouldbeconfirmedinfuturestudies,thereshoulddefinitelybeaplaceforlamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression,atleastincombinationwithlithium. Animportantadvantageoflamotrigineisitsbenignadverseeffectprofilewithnoweightgain,sedationormetabolicsyndrome.Theonlyseriousriskisasevererash,butwithcarefuldosingthechanceforsucharashislimitedandextremelyrare.

The long-term efficacy of drugs in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder

Inbipolardisordersthefocusshouldalwaysbeonmaintenancetreatment:thepreventionagainstnewepisodesusingmedicationwithapositivebenefit(effectiveness)/risk(adverseeffects)profile. Maybethebiggestprobleminlong-termstudiesistochoosetherightdesign,whichinpracticeisalwaysacompromisebetweenpossibilitiesandimpossibilities.Thereisadelicatebalancebetween‘hardcore’randomizedplacebo-controlledefficacytrialswithhighlyselectedpatients,and‘realpractice’effectivenesstrialswithadesignwhichfocusesmoreongeneralizability.Itisquestionablewhethertheusualstandardforefficacystudies(therandomizedplacebo-controlledmonotherapytrial)isthebestwaytofindnewstrategiesforthelong-termtreatmentofbipolardisorder. Forregistrationpurposes,double-blindplacebo-controlledefficacytrialsarerequestedbytheauthorities.ThemainideabehindRCT’sistomakeequalandcomparablegroupsallowingacomparisonbetweentheinvestigatedcompoundandplacebo(orothercontroltreatments),whichisessentialinefficacystudies.Inacutetreatmentstudies(ofmaniaordepression)patientsaredirectlyrandomizedtostartwiththeinvestigationaldrugorplacebo(withthepossibilityofathirdarmwithadrugwithprovenefficacy,thesocalledstandardtreatment). Forlong-termtrialstherearehoweverafewdesignoptionswith

127

6

Discussion 127

advantagesanddisadvantages.Mostlong-termstudiesuseso-calledenricheddesigns(35).Inthesestudiesallpatientsstartopenlabelwiththeinvestigationaldrug,forinstanceastreatmentofanacutemanicordepressiveepisode.Thereafter,responderstotreatmentarerandomizedtocontinuationoftheinvestigationaldrugortoswitchtoplacebo(againwiththepossibilityofathirdarmwithadrugwithprovenefficacy,thesocalledstandardtreatment).Goodexamplesofthisarethetwolong-termlamotriginestudies(28;29)inwhichmanicordepressedpatientsfirstreceivedopenlabeltreatmentwithlamotrigine.Responderstolamotriginewererandomizedtocontinuewithlamotrigineortoswitchtoplaceboortolithium(thestandardtreatment).Thisenricheddesignalsohasitslimitations.Itfavorstheinvestigationaldrug(intheexamplelamotrigine)overthestandardcomparisondrug(intheexamplelithium)asonlyresponderswhoalsotoleratedtheinvestigationaldrugentertherandomizedphase. AnexampleofanotherdesignistheBALANCEstudy(36).Inthisstudycomparingtheprophylacticeffectoflithium,valproateendthecombinationofboth,patientsenteredthestudyduringanepisodefowhichtheyweretreatedwiththecombinationofbothdrugs.Stabilizedpatientswererandomizedtocontinuetreatmentwitheitherlithium(monotherapy),valproate(monotherapy)ortocontinuewiththecombinationofboth.Thisisalsoanenricheddesignwithaselectiononresponseandtolerancetolithiumandvalproate,butwithoutfavoringoneofthecompounds. AthirdexampleofmaintenancetrialsisreflectedbythreestudiesbyGreiletal(37),Hartongetal.(38)andLichtetal.(39)Inthesestudieslithiumwascomparedtocarbamazepine(Greil/Hartong)orvalproate(Licht).Patientsenteredthestudyduringorafteranacutemanicordepressedepisodethatwastreatedwithmedicationsotherthantheinvestigationaldrugs(lithiumandcarbamazepineorvalproate).Afterrecoveryfromtheepisodepatientswererandomizedtothestudydrugsandsimultaneouslytheotherdrugsweretaperedoff.Subsequentlypatientswerefolloweduntiltherecurrenceofanewepisodeoruntilendoffollow-up. Inourstudyweusedanextensiondesignwithextendedblindfollow-upafterashort-termdouble-blindrandomizedtrial(phaseI)inwhichpatients

128 Chapter 6128

receivedadditionofeitherlamotrigineorplacebo.Aftertheacutetrial(phaseIandphaseII)wefollowedtherespondersupto68weekswithoutnewrandomizationafterrecovery,butwithkeepingthetreatments(lamotrigineofplacebo)blindedthroughoutfollow-up.Assuch,ourstudydoesnotprovethatlamotriginehasaprophylacticeffect.Forthatpurposeweshouldhavere-randomizedallresponderstolamotrigineafterphaseItocontinuedouble-blindwithlamotrigineortoswitchtoplacebo(asinthefirstexampleabovewiththeenricheddesign).Besidesthatwedidnotaimforthatgoal,wealsohadtoofewpatientsforsuchastudy.Forrandomizingtwiceduringonestudy,manymorepatientsshouldhavebeenrequired.Moreover,itcanleadtoanoverpoweredfirstpartofthestudyoranunderpoweredsecondpartofthestudy(andnottomentiontheextraproblemswiththeadditionofparoxetineinnon-respondersafter8weeks).Therefore,wechooseforanaturalistic,blindfollow-upinresponders.

Limitation of the add-on design

Alimitationofourstudyisthatweonlygatheredinformationonaddingnewmedication(s).Wehavenoinformationonhowtocontinuetreatment.Wouldithavebeenpossibletotaperofflithiumorlamotrigine,andwhattodowithparoxetine?Thisproblemisuntilnowanalmostunmetneed.Moststudiessofararedesignedtogatherinformationonshort-andlong-termefficacyandtolerabilityofstartingnewcompoundsandcombinations,buthardlyonhowtheymightbestopped.Thisisprobablypartlyrelatedtothefactthatsponsoringofatrialinvestigatingstoppingofmedicationisnotinterestingforpharmaceuticalcompanies.Moreover,thelong-termmaintenancestudies(withenricheddesigns)aresetuptoproofefficacy(andtolerability)butnottofindoutwhichpatientsareinneedoflong-termtreatmentandwhichpatientsarenot.Medicationsareoftenaddedtotheineffective(oronlypartiallyeffective)treatment,withoutknowingwhetheritwouldalsohavebeenanoptiontoswitchfromthe(partially)ineffectivetreatmenttoanotherdrug.I.e.woulditalsobepossibletostopthefirstdrug(inourstudylithium)insteadofaddingnewmedicationtothefirstdrug.

129

6

Discussion 129

Patientscanbereluctanttostopmedicationorcombinationsofmedications.Atleastsomepatientswanttocontinuemedicationiftheybelievethatthesedrugskeptthemstableoveralongtime.Thisisunderpinnedbyanintendedstudyinwhichbipolardepressedresponderstotheadditionofanantidepressant(toongoingtreatmentwithmoodstabilizers)(40)wereaskedtoconsenttoberandomizedtodouble-blindcontinuingorstoppingoftheaddedantidepressant.Itprovedalmostimpossibletofindpatientswhoacceptedtoberandomizedafterasuccessfullytreateddepressiveepisode.Somepatientsonlywantedtokeeptheirmedication,buttherewerealsopatientswhowerereluctanttocontinuetheirmedication,forinstancebecauseofadverseeffects,orbecausetheywereill-affectedtotake(toomany)drugs.Finallythestudywascompletedbycomparingtwonon-randomizedgroupsofpatientswhothemselveshaddecidedtostoptheantidepressantortocontinuetheantidepressantwithquestionableresults. Theonlyrandomizeddiscontinuationtrialwithantidepressantsinbipolardepression(41)showednosignificantbenefitfromcontinuingantidepressantsinthelong-termtreatmentofbipolarpatientsontheprimaryoutcome(meanchangeonthedepressivesubscaleoftheCMF).Onlytimetoafirstnewdepressiveepisodewassignificantlylongerforthegroupthatcontinuedwiththeantidepressant.However,alsotheseresultsarequestionable,giverthefactthatthiswasafollow-upstudyoftheSTEP-BDtrialwithallit’smethodologicallimitationsdescribedabove.

Conclusion

Inourstudytheadditionoflamotriginetoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumwasmoreeffectivethantheadditionofplacebointhetreatmentofacutebipolardepression.Moreover,wefoundafterfurthercontinuationoftreatment,thatlamotrigineappearedtomaintainitseffect.Duetothefactthatwedidnotre-randomizepatientsafterthefirst8(or16)weeksoftreatment,theresultsofthefollow-upphasecannotbeconsideredasevidenceforthelong-termeffectivenessoflamotrigine.However,thereissuchevidencefromtwootherstudies,inwhich

130 Chapter 6130

responderstolamotriginewererandomizedtocontinuewithlamotrigineortoswitchtoplacebo(orlithium)(28;29). Furtherresearchonthetreatmentofbipolardepressionshouldbedirectedtofind(other)long-termtreatment(s)withmaximumeffectivenessandwithminimaladverseeffects.Inaddition,futureresearchshouldnotonlybedirectedtotheeffectivenessandsafetyofstartingmedication(s)butalsototherisksandbenefitsofstoppingmedication(s).Moreover,theoptimalbalancebetweenefficacyandadverseeffectsisdifferentforeachindividualandthereforeachallengetothecooperationbetweendoctorandpatient.Psychoeducationisnotamatterofconvincingpatientstoacceptadverseeffects,itismoreaquesttofindtherightmedicationorcombinationofmedicationsfitfortheindividualpatientwithoptimalfunctioninginallaspectsofhumanlife.

131

6

Discussion 131

References

1. RegeerEJ,tenHM,RossoML,Hakkaart-vanRL,VolleberghW,NolenWA.Prevalenceofbipolardisorderinthegeneralpopulation:aReappraisalStudyoftheNetherlandsMentalHealthSurveyandIncidenceStudy.ActaPsychiatrScand2004Nov;110(5):374-82.

2. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJ,CoryellW,EndicottJ,MaserJD,etal.Aprospectiveinvestigationofthenaturalhistoryofthelong-termweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003Mar;60(3):261-9.

3. JuddLL,AkiskalHS,SchettlerPJ,EndicottJ,MaserJ,SolomonDA,etal.Thelong-termnaturalhistoryoftheweeklysymptomaticstatusofbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2002Jun;59(6):530-7.

4. KupkaRW,AltshulerLL,NolenWA,SuppesT,LuckenbaughDA,LeverichGS,etal.ThreetimesmoredepressionthanmaniainbothbipolarIandbipolarIIdisorder.Bipolardisorders2007;9:531-535.

5. VietaE.Antidepressantsinbipolardepression.ActaPsychiatrScand2008Nov;118(5):335-6.

6. GijsmanHJ,GeddesJR,RendellJM,NolenWA,GoodwinGM.Antidepressantsforbipolardepression:asystematicreviewofrandomized,controlledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004Sep;161(9):1537-47.

7. VietaE,LocklearJ,GuntherO,EkmanM,MiltenburgerC,ChattertonML,etal.Treatmentoptionsforbipolardepression:asystematicreviewofrandomized,controlledtrials.JClinPsychopharmacol2010Oct;30(5):579-90.

8. MendlewiczJ,YoudimMB.Antidepressantpotentiationof5-hydroxytryptophanbyL-deprenilinaffectiveillness.JAffectDisord1980Jun;2(2):137-46.

9. HimmelhochJM,FuchsCZ,SymonsBJ.Adouble-blindstudyoftranylcyprominetreatmentofmajoranergicdepression.JNervMentDis1982Oct;170(10):628-34.

10.CohnJB,CollinsG,AshbrookE,WernickeJF.Acomparisonoffluoxetineimipramineandplaceboinpatientswithbipolardepressivedisorder.IntClinPsychopharmacol1989Oct;4(4):313-22.

11.NemeroffCB,EvansDL,GyulaiL,SachsGS,BowdenCL,GergelIP,etal.Double-

132 Chapter 6132

blind,placebo-controlledcomparisonofimipramineandparoxetineinthetreatmentofbipolardepression.AmJPsychiatry2001Jun;158(6):906-12.

12. SachsGS,NierenbergAA,CalabreseJR,MarangellLB,WisniewskiSR,GyulaiL,etal.Effectivenessofadjunctiveantidepressanttreatmentforbipolardepression.NEnglJMed2007Apr26;356(17):1711-22.

13.McElroySL,WeislerRH,ChangW,OlaussonB,PaulssonB,BrecherM,etal.Adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudyofquetiapineandparoxetineasmonotherapyinadultswithbipolardepression(EMBOLDENII).JClinPsychiatry2010Feb;71(2):163-74.

14. PostRM,AltshulerLL,LeverichGS,FryeMA,NolenWA,KupkaRW,etal.Moodswitchinbipolardepression:comparisonofadjunctivevenlafaxine,bupropionandsertraline.BrJPsychiatry2006Aug;189:124-31.

15. LeverichGS,AltshulerLL,FryeMA,SuppesT,McElroySL,KeckPE,Jr.,etal.Riskofswitchinmoodpolaritytohypomaniaormaniainpatientswithbipolardepressionduringacuteandcontinuationtrialsofvenlafaxine,sertraline,andbupropionasadjunctstomoodstabilizers.AmJPsychiatry2006Feb;163(2):232-9.

16. LichtRW,GijsmanH,NolenWA,AngstJ.Areantidepressantssafeinthetreatmentofbipolardepression?Acriticalevaluationoftheirpotentialrisktoinduceswitchintomaniaorcycleacceleration.ActaPsychiatrScand2008Nov;118(5):337-46.

17. PostRM,LeverichGS,AltshulerLL,FryeMA,SuppesT,KeckPE,etal.Differentialclinicalcharacteristics,medicationusage,andtreatmentresponseofbipolardisorderintheUSversusTheNetherlandsandGermany.IntClinPsychopharmacol2011Mar;26(2):96-106.

18. ZornbergGL,PopeHG,Jr.Treatmentofdepressioninbipolardisorder:newdirectionsforresearch.JClinPsychopharmacol1993Dec;13(6):397-408.

19. YoungAH,McElroySL,BauerM,PhilipsN,ChangW,OlaussonB,etal.Adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudyofquetiapineandlithiummonotherapyinadultsintheacutephaseofbipolardepression(EMBOLDENI).JClinPsychiatry2010Feb;71(2):150-62.

20. BondDJ,LamRW,YathamLN.Divalproexsodiumversusplacebointhetreatmentofacutebipolardepression:asystematicreviewandmeta-analysis.JAffectDisord2010Aug;124(3):228-34.

133

6

Discussion 133

21. SmithLA,CorneliusVR,AzorinJM,PerugiG,VietaE,YoungAH,etal.Valproateforthetreatmentofacutebipolardepression:systematicreviewandmeta-analysis.JAffectDisord2010Apr;122(1-2):1-9.

22. ZhangZJ,KangWH,TanQR,LiQ,GaoCG,ZhangFG,etal.Adjunctiveherbalmedicinewithcarbamazepineforbipolardisorders:Adouble-blind,randomized,placebo-controlledstudy.JPsychiatrRes2007Apr;41(3-4):360-9.

23. TohenM,VietaE,CalabreseJ,KetterTA,SachsG,BowdenC,etal.Efficacyofolanzapineandolanzapine-fluoxetinecombinationinthetreatmentofbipolarIdepression.ArchGenPsychiatry2003Nov;60(11):1079-88.

24.CalabreseJR,KeckPE,Jr.,MacfaddenW,MinkwitzM,KetterTA,WeislerRH,etal.ARandomized,Double-Blind,Placebo-ControlledTrialofQuetiapineintheTreatmentofBipolarIorIIDepression.AmJPsychiatry2005Jul;162(7):1351-60.

25. ThaseME,MacfaddenW,WeislerRH,ChangW,PaulssonB,KhanA,etal.EfficacyofquetiapinemonotherapyinbipolarIandIIdepression:adouble-blind,placebo-controlledstudy(theBOLDERIIstudy).JClinPsychopharmacol2006Dec;26(6):600-9.

26.GeddesJR,BurgessS,HawtonK,JamisonK,GoodwinGM.Long-termlithiumtherapyforbipolardisorder:systematicreviewandmeta-analysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials.AmJPsychiatry2004Feb;161(2):217-22.

27.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsGS,AscherJA,MonaghanE,RuddGD.Adouble-blindplacebo-controlledstudyoflamotriginemonotherapyinoutpatientswithbipolarIdepression.Lamictal602StudyGroup.JClinPsychiatry1999Feb;60(2):79-88.

28. BowdenCL,CalabreseJR,SachsG,YathamLN,AsgharSA,HomplandM,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlymanicorhypomanicpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.ArchGenPsychiatry2003Apr;60(4):392-400.

29.CalabreseJR,BowdenCL,SachsG,YathamLN,BehnkeK,MehtonenOP,etal.Aplacebo-controlled18-monthtrialoflamotrigineandlithiummaintenancetreatmentinrecentlydepressedpatientswithbipolarIdisorder.JClinPsychiatry2003Sep;64(9):1013-24.

30. BrownE.,KeckP.E.,DeldarA.,AdamsD.H.,WilliamsonD.J.Olanzapine/FluoxetineCombinationversusLamotrigineinthetreatmentofBipolarIDepression.2005.

134 Chapter 6134

31. vanderLoosML,MulderPG,HartongEG,BlomMB,VergouwenAC,deKeyzer

HJ,etal.Efficacyandsafetyoflamotrigineasadd-ontreatmenttolithiuminbipolar

depression:amulticenter,double-blind,placebo-controlledtrial.JClinPsychiatry

2009Feb;70(2):223-31.

32.CalabreseJR,HuffmanRF,WhiteRL,EdwardsS,ThompsonTR,AscherJA,etal.

Lamotrigineintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression:resultsoffivedouble-blind,

placebo-controlledclinicaltrials.BipolarDisord2008Mar;10(2):323-33.

33. vanderLoosML,MulderP,HartongEG,BlomMB,VergouwenAC,vanNoorden

MS,etal.Efficacyandsafetyoftwotreatmentalgorithmsinbipolardepression

consistingofacombinationoflithium,lamotrigineorplaceboandparoxetine.Acta

PsychiatrScand2010Sep;122(3):246-54.

34. vanderLoosML,MulderP,HartongEG,BlomMB,VergouwenAC,vanNoorden

MS,etal.Long-termoutcomeofbipolardepressedpatientsreceivinglamotrigineas

add-ontolithiumwiththepossibilityoftheadditionofparoxetineinnonresponders:

arandomized,placebo-controlledtrialwithanoveldesign.BipolarDisord2011

Feb;13(1):111-7.

35. ZimmermanM,PosternakMA,RuggeroCJ.Impactofstudydesignontheresultsofcontinuationstudiesofantidepressants.JClinPsychopharmacol2007Apr;27(2):177-81.

36.GeddesJR,GoodwinGM,RendellJ,AzorinJM,CiprianiA,OstacherMJ,etal.LithiumplusvalproatecombinationtherapyversusmonotherapyforrelapsepreventioninbipolarIdisorder(BALANCE):arandomisedopen-labeltrial.Lancet2010Jan30;375(9712):385-95.

37.GreilW,Ludwig-MayerhoferW,ErazoN,SchochlinC,SchmidtS,EngelRR,etal.Lithiumversuscarbamazepineinthemaintenancetreatmentofbipolardisorders--arandomisedstudy.JAffectDisord1997Apr;43(2):151-61.

38.HartongEG,MolemanP,HoogduinCA,BroekmanTG,NolenWA.Prophylacticefficacyoflithiumversuscarbamazepineintreatment-naivebipolarpatients.JClinPsychiatry2003Feb;64(2):144-51.

135

6

Discussion 135

39. LichtRW,NielsenJN,GramLF,VestergaardP,BendzH.LamotrigineversuslithiumasmaintenancetreatmentinbipolarIdisorder:anopen,randomizedeffectivenessstudymimickingclinicalpractice.The6trialoftheDanishUniversityAntidepressantGroup(DUAG-6).BipolarDisord2010Aug;12(5):483-93.

40. PostRM,LeverichGS,NolenWA,KupkaRW,AltshulerLL,FryeMA,etal.Are-evaluationoftheroleofantidepressantsinthetreatmentofbipolardepression:datafromtheStanleyFoundationBipolarNetwork.BipolarDisord2003Dec;5(6):396-406.

41.GhaemiSN,OstacherMM,El-MallakhRS,BorrelliD,BaldassanoCF,KelleyME,etal.Antidepressantdiscontinuationinbipolardepression:aSystematicTreatmentEnhancementProgramforBipolarDisorder(STEP-BD)randomizedclinicaltrialoflong-termeffectivenessandsafety.JClinPsychiatry2010Apr;71(4):372-80.

137

Summary

138138

Design of the study

Inthisthesiswedescribeaninvestigator(W.A.Nolen)initiateddouble-blindrandomizedplacebo-controlledtrial(RCT)comparingtwodifferenttreatmentalgorithmswithafollow-upuntilamaximumof68weeks. Inbipolaroutpatients(menorwomenagedatleast18years),withadepressiondespitelong-termtreatmentwithlithium(atserumlevelsof0.6-1.2mmol/l)lamotrigineorplacebowasaddedtoongoingtreatmentwithlithium.Innon-respondersafter8weeksparoxetinewasopen-labeladdedtoongoingtreatmentwithlithiumpluslamotrigineorplacebo.Respondersafter8or16weekswerefolloweduntilarelapseorrecurrenceoruntilthemaximumdurationofthestudy;68weeks(fig1).

Figure 1. Designofthestudy

ThestudywasapprovedbytheethicalreviewboardoftheUniversityMedicalCenterUtrecht,theNetherlandsandbylocalinstitutionalreviewboardsintheNetherlandsandinSpain.Allpatientsgavewritteninformedconsent.


Lithium

Lithium

Lithium

+Lamotrigine

+Placebo

Phase 1 Phase 2 Follow-up of respondersPhase 3


Week 0 8 16 68

Responders

139Summary 139

Results

Figure 2.Flowchartofthestudy

124Patientswererandomised,112intheNetherlandsand12inSpain.

Phase 1: week 1-8 (chapter 3) Ofthe64patientswhostartedinthelamotriginegroup(fig2),52patients(81%)completedthefirst8weeksversus50(83%)ofthe60patientsintheplacebogroup.Ontheprimaryoutcomemeasure(changeinMADRSscorefrombaselinetoweek8;-15.38vs.-11.03respectively;P=0.024)aswellasonsomesecondaryoutcomemeasureslamotriginewassignificantlymoreefficaciousthanplacebo(fig3).

Randomized:124





Drop-outs:6

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:3

Drop-out:3


Drop-outs:2

Drop-out:1

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:2


Completed:8





Phas

e2

Phas

e1

140140

Figure 3. SeverityofdepressionaccordingtothemeanMADRSscoreateachvisitforpatientsonplaceboandlamotrigine

Phase 2: week 9-16 (chapter 4) After8weeksresponderstothelithium-lamotrigineandthelithium-placebocombinationcontinuedthestudywithlithiumand(stilldouble-blind)lamotrigineorplacebo,whileopen-labelparoxetinewasaddedinnon-responders.Althoughbothgroupsimprovedfurther,thedifferenceafter16weeksbetweenlithiumpluslamotrigine(plusparoxetineinnon-responders)versuslithiumplusplacebo(plusparoxetineinnonresponders)wasnotstatisticallysignificantanymore(changeinMADRSscorefrombaselinetoweek16-17.91versus-15.40respectively;p=0.253).Othersecondaryoutcomecriteriaalsodidnotrevealsignificantdifferencesatweek16(fig4).

*p=.031**p=.006

30

25

20

15

10

5


PlaceboLamotrigine

***

MA

DRS

Sco

re,m

ean

141Summary 141

Figure 4. SeverityofdepressionaccordingtothemeanMADRSscoreateachvisitforpatientsonplaceboandlamotrigine(plusadditionofparoxetineinnon-respondersatweek8)

Phase 3: week 17-68 (chapter 5) Duringfollow-uprespondersafter8or16weeksweremaintainedonstudymedicationsuntilamanicordepressiveepisodeoruntilthemaximumdurationofthestudy,i.e.untilweek68.Descriptivestatisticsshowedthatthedifference(aspercentageofrespondersoftheinitialgroup)betweenthelamotriginegroupversustheplacebogroupremainedstablethroughoutthefollow-upperiod(fig5and6).

***

*** P<0.05**P<0.01 Additionofparoxetine

Weeks

Mea

nM

AD

RSs

core

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

5

10

15

20

25

30

PlaceboLamotrigine

142142

Figure 5. Responders(CGI-BPimprovementofdepressionscoreof1or2)aspercentageoftheinitialgroup(n=124,lamotriginen=64,placebon=60)throughoutallthreephasesofthestudy

Alsotimefromfirstresponse(score<50%ofMADRSscoreatbaseline)torecurrence(score≥50%ofinitialMADRS)showedasimilarpatterninfavourofthelamotriginegroup. Themediansurvivaltimeforrespondersofthelamotriginegroupwas10.0months(95%CI:1.1-18.8)versus3.5months(CI:0.7–7.0)fortherespondersintheplacebogroup.

Weeks

Perc

enta

gere

spon

ders

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68

143Summary 143

Figure 6. Probabilityofmaintainingresponse(score<50%ofMADRSscoreatbaseline;n=79;lamotrigine:n=41;placebo:n=38)withoutrecurrence(score≥50%ofinitialMADRS)sincehavingachievedresponderstatusduringphase1orphase2

Safety and Adverse Events

Duringthe68weeksofthestudytherewere20SeriousAdverseEvents(SAE),15duringthefirst16weeksand5thereafter.10patientsinthelamotriginegroup(2patientshad2SAEs)groupversus8patientsintheplacebogroupexperiencedaSAE.MostSAEsconcernedseriousmoodswingsascouldbeexpectedinatrialwith124bipolarpatients.Statisticallytherewerenodifferencesbetweenlamotrigineandplacebo.Theonlystatisticaldifferencebetweenlamotrigineandplaceboinadverseeventswastremorat16weekswhichoccurredmoreofteninthelamotriginegroupversustheplacebogroup.So,wecanconcludethattheadditionoflamotriginetolithium(withfurtheradditionofparoxetineinnon-responders)wassafeandhadanadverseeventsprofilecomparabletotheadditionofplacebotolithium.

Months

Prob

abili

tyo

fno

recu

rrenc

e

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 3 6 9 12 15 18

144144

Conclusions

Afterthisstudyseveralconclusionsconsideringthetreatmentandfutureresearchofpatientswithabipolardepressioncanbedrawn.

1. Theadditionoflamotriginetolithiuminpatientswithbipolardepressionisefficaciousandoverallwelltolerated.

2. Afterthefurtheradditionofparoxetineinnon-responderstothecombinationoflithiumpluslamotrigineorplacebothestatisticalsignificancebetweenthetreatmentarmwithlamotriginegroupandthetreatmentarmwithplacebogroupdisappearedwithongoingimprovementinbothgroups.However,thetreatmentarmwithlamotrigineremainednumericallymoreeffective,alsoduringfollow-upuptooneyear.

3. Thesefindingsindicatethatlamotrigine-inadditiontoitsuseinthelong-termpreventionofdepressiveepisodes-alsodeservesaplaceintheacutetreatmentofbipolardepression.

4. Thegapbetweenscientificresearchwithrandomizedplacebo-controlledtrialsandclinicalpracticecanbebridgedbydesigningstudiescomparingcombinationsofmedications.

145Summary 145

146146

147

Samenvatting

148148

Design van de studie

InditproefschriftbeschrijvenwijeendoorW.A.Nolengeinitialiseerddubbelblindplacebogecontroleerdonderzoekwaarintweebehandelingalgoritmesvergelekenwerdenmeteenvervolgtoteenmaximumvan68weken.Bijbipolairedepressievepatiënten(manofvrouw,ouderdan18jaar)meteenbipolairedepressieondankslangdurigebehandelingmetlithium(bloedspiegels0.6-1.2mmol/lwerdlamotrigineofplacebotoegevoegd. Naachtwekenkregennon-respondersinbeidegroepen(lithium+lamotrigineoflithium+placebo)‘openlabel’paroxetine(20mg)extratoegevoegd.Respondersna8of16wekenwerdengevolgdtoteenterugvalineendepressieveof(hypo)manischeepisodeoftotheteindvandestudiena68weken.

Figuur 1. Ontwerpvandestudie

VoorafgaandaandestudiewastoestemmingverleenddoordemedischethischetoetsingscommissievanhetUMCUtrechtendoorde


Lithium

Lithium

Lithium

+Lamotrigine

+Placebo

Fase 1 Fase 2 Follow-up of respondersFase 3


Week 0 8 16 68

Responders

149Samenvatting 149

lokaletoetsingscommissiesinNederlandeninSpanje.Allepatiëntengavenvoorafgaandaandestudie‘informedconsent’.

Results

Figuur 2. ‘FlowChart’vandestudie

124patiëntenwerdengerandomiseerd,112inNederlanden12inSpanje.

Fase I: week 1-8 (hoofdstuk 3) 52vande64patiënten(81%)indelamotriginegroepdieindestudiestarttenvoltooidendeeerste8wekenvanhetonderzoekversus50vande60patiënten(83%)indeplacebogroep(fig2).Opdeprimaireuitkomstmaat;de

Randomized:124





Drop-outs:6

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:1

Drop-out:3

Drop-out:3


Drop-outs:2

Drop-out:1

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:4

Drop-outs:2


Completed:8





Phas

e2

Phas

e1

150150

veranderinggemetenvan‘baseline’totenmetweek8opdeMontgomery-ÅsbergDepressionRatingScale(MADRS)(enopsommigesecundaireuitkomstmaten)bleekdetoevoegingvanlamotrigineaanlithiumstatistischsignificant(-15,38versus-11.03p=0.024)effectieverdandetoevoegingvanplaceboaanlithium(fig3).

Figuur 3.ErnstvandedepressiegemetenalsgemiddeldeMADRSscoretijdenselkevisitevoorpatiëntenoplamotrigineenplacebo

Fase II: week 9-16 (hoofdstuk 4) Na8wekenvervolgdenrespondersopzoweldelithiumlamotriginecombinatiealsderespondersopdelithiumplacebocombinatiedestudiemetdezelfde(nogsteedsdubbelblinde)medicatie.Bijnon-respondersinbeidegroepenwerd‘openlabel’20mgparoxetinetoegevoegd. Beidegroepenverbeterdenverder,maarhetverschiltussendegroepmetlithium+lamotrigine+paroxetine(vanaf8wekeninnon-responders)versusdegroepmetlithium+placebo+paroxetine(vanaf8wekeninnon-responders)wasnietlangerstatistischsignificant(-17.91versus-15.40p=0.253)(fig4).Ookanderesecundaireuitkomstmatenwarennietstatistischsignificant.

*p=.031**p=.006

30

25

20

15

10

5


PlaceboLamotrigine

***

MA

DRS

Sco

re,g

emid

deld

151Samenvatting 151

Figuur 4. ErnstvandedepressievolgensdeMADRSopelkebezoekvoorpatiëntenmetlamotrigineenplacebotoevoegingaanlithium(plusadditievanparoxetinena8wekenbijnon-respons)

Fase III: week 17-68 (hoofdstuk 5) Respondersna8of16wekenwerdenverdergevolgdmetbehoudvandezelfde(deelsdubbelblinde)medicatietoteennieuwedepressieveof(hypo)manischeepisodeoftotheteindvandestudiena68weken.Uitbeschrijvendestatistiekbleekdathetverschiltussendelamotriginegroependeplacebogroep(gemetenalspercentagerespondersvande2oorspronkelijkegroepen)stabielbleefgedurendede‘follow-up’(fig5en6).

***

*** P<0.05**P<0.01 Plusadditievanparoxetine

Weken

Gem

idde

lde

MA

DRS

sco

re

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16

5

10

15

20

25

30

PlaceboLamotrigine

152152

Figuur 5. Responders(volgensdeCGI-BPverbeteringdepressiescore1of2)alspercentagevandeoorspronkelijkegroep(n=124,n=64voorlamotrigineenn=60voorplacebo)gedurendealledriedefasesvandestudie

Ookdetijdvanafdeeerstekeerdateenpatiëntresponderswas(MADRSscore<50%vandeinitiëlescore)totterugval(MADRSscore≥50%vandeinitiëlescore)liethetzelfdepatroonzien.Degemiddeldetijdalsrespondervoordelamotriginegroepwas10.0maanden(95%CI:1.1-18.8)versus3.5maanden(95%CI0.7-7.0)voorderespondersindeplacebogroep.

Weken

Perc

enta

gere

spon

ders

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40 44 48 52 56 60 64 68

153Samenvatting 153

Figuur 6. Kansomresponderteblijven(score<50%ofMADRSscoreopbaseline;n=79;lamotrigine:n=41;placebo:n=38)zonderterugval(score≥50%vandeoorspronkelijkeMADRS)nadatmenrespondergewordenisgedurendefase1offase2

Veiligheid en bijwerkingen

Gedurendede68wekenvandezestudiewarener20SAE’s(SeriousAdverseEvents),15gedurendedeeerste16wekenen5daarna.10patiëntenindelamotriginegroep(2patiëntenhadden2SAE’s)versus8patiëntenindeplacebogroepkregeneenSAE.DemeesteSAE’swarenheftigestemmingswisselingen.Ditwasnietonverwachtineengroepvan124bipolairepatiënten.Overdegeheleperiodewaseralleenna16wekenvoorwatbetreft.tremoreenstatistischverschiltussenlamotrigineenplacebotengunstevanplacebo.Voorderestwasergeenenkelstatistischsignificantverschiltussenlamotrigineenplacebooverdegehelestudie. Concluderendkunnenwestellendatdetoevoegingvanlamotrigineaanlithium(metdaarnadetoevoegingvanparoxetinebijnon-respons)veiligwasen

Maanden

Waa

rsch

ijnlij

khei

dva

nte

rugv

al

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

20

10

0

PlaceboLamotrigine

0 3 6 9 12 15 18

154154

datdebijwerkingenvandetoevoegingvanlamotrigineaanlithiumvergelijkbaarwarenmetdetoevoegingvanplaceboaanlithium.

Conclusies

Nadezestudiekunnenweeenaantalconclusiestrekkenoverdebehandelingentoekomstigonderzoekbijpatiëntenmeteenbipolairestoornisgedurendeeendepressievefase.

1. Detoevoegingvanlamotrigineaanlithiumbijpatiëntenmeteenbipolairestoornisgedurendeeendepressievefaseiseffectiefenveilig.

2. Nadetoevoegingvanparoxetineop8wekenbijnon-respondersverdweenhetstatistischsignificanteverschiltussendebehandelingmetlamotrigineenlithiumversusdebehandelingmetplaceboenlithium.Beidegroepenverbeterdennogwelverdertussende8en16weken.Ooktijdenshetvervolgtot68wekenbleefdebehandelarmmetlamotrigineinaantaleffectieverdandebehandelarmmetplacebo.

3. Dezeresultatenlatenziendatlamotrigine-intoevoegingaanhetgebruikvoordepreventieopdelangetermijnvannieuwedepressieveepisoden-ookeenplaatsverdientindeacutebehandelingvandebipolairedepressie.

4. Deklooftussenwetenschappelijkonderzoekendedagelijksebehandelpraktijkkanoverbrugdwordendoorhetontwerpenvanstudiesdiekijkennaarcombinatiesvanmedicatie.

155Samenvatting 155

156156

157

Curriculum VitaeM.L.M. van der Loos

158158

Curriculum Vitae

MarcvanderLooswerdop10maart1958geboreninAmsterdam.NadeafrondingvanhetVWOstarttehijaandeAmsterdamseAcademievoorLichamelijkOefeningdeopleidingtotgymnastiekleraar.AansluitendstudeerdehijgeneeskundeaandeUniversiteitvanAmsterdam. IndezelfdeperiodewerktehijalsslowmotionredacteurenlateralsregisseurbijNOSStudioSport. DespecialisatiepsychiatriewerdgevolgdbijhetHaags-LeidsOpleidingsConsortiummetProf.HGM.Rooijmansalsopleider. Sinds1997ishijwerkzaamalspsychiaterbijdeIsalaKliniekenlok.SophiainZwolle.

Publicaties

Lamotrigine bij de behandeling van bipolaire stoornissen.TijdschriftvoorPsychiatrie49(2007)2,95-103M.L.M.vanderLoos,P.Kölling,E.A.M.Knoppert-vanderKlein,W.A.Nolen

Efficacy and safety of lamotrigine as add-on to lithium in the treatment of bipolar depression: a multi-center, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial J.ClinPsychiatryvol70;223-31MarcL.M.vanderLoosMD1;PaulMulderPhD2;ErwinG.Th.M.HartongMDPhD3;MarcB.J.BlomMD4;AntonC.Vergouwen,MDPhD5;HermanJ.U.E.MdeKeyzerMD6;PeterJ.H.NottenMD7;MarijkeL.LuteijnMD8;ManuelaA.TimmermansM.Sc9;EduardVietaMDPhD10;WillemA.Nolen,MDPhD11andtheLamLitStudyGroup*

Efficacy and safety of two treatment algorithms in bipolar depression consisting of a combination of lithium, lamotrigine or placebo and paroxetine.ActaPsychiatrScand.2010;122:246-54.

159159Curriculum Vitae M.L.M. van der Loos

MarcL.M.vanderLoosMD1;PaulMulderPhD2;ErwinG.Th.M.HartongMDPhD3;MarcB.J.BlomMD4;AntonC.Vergouwen,MDPhD5;MartijnSvanNoorden6;ManuelaA.TimmermansM.Sc7;EduardVietaMDPhD8;WillemA.Nolen,MDPhD9;fortheLamLitStudyGroup*

Treatment of Unipolar Psychotic DepressionA randomized, double-blind study comparing imipramine, venlafaxine, and venlafaxine plus quetiapineActaPsychiatricaScandinavica;2010Mar.121(3);190-200JaapWijkstra,HuibertBurger,WalterW.vandenBroek,TomK.Birkenhager,JoostG.E.Janzing,MarcoP.M.Boks,JanA.Bruijn,MarcL.M.vanderLoos,LeonieM.T.Breteler,GuillaumeM.G.I.Ramaekers,RobbertJ.Verkes,WillemA.Nolen,

Long term response to successfull acute pharmacological treatment of psychotic depressionJournalofaffectivedisorders;2010Jun;123(1-3);238-42JaapWijkstra,HuibertBurger,WalterW.vandenBroek,TomK.Birkenhager,JoostG.E.Janzing,MarcoP.M.Boks,JanA.Bruijn,MarcL.M.vanderLoos,LeonieM.T.Breteler,RobbertJ.Verkes,WillemA.Nolen,

Long-term outcome of bipolar depressed patients receiving lamotrigine as add-on to lithium with the possibility of the addition of paroxetine in nonresponders: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial with a novel design.BipolarDisord.2011;13:111-7vanderLoosML,MulderP,HartongEG,BlomMB,VergouwenAC,vanNoordenMS,etal.

160160

Voordrachten

Lamotrigine as add-on to lithium in bipolar depression5-10-2006Barcelona,InternationalSocietyofBipolarDepressionStanleyConferencemeeting,presentation

Lamotrigine as add-on to lithium in bipolar depression followed by open label paroxetine addition in non-responders26-10-2007Kopenhagen,DUAGsymposiumPresentation

Workshop; ‘Farmacologische behandeling bipolaire depressie’15-10-2009,Apeldoorn:Nationaalfarmacotherapiecongres

Presentatie: Farmacotherapie in de onderhoudsfase10-11-2009Utrecht:NajaarssymposiumBipolairestoornissen

Posters

Verhoogde plasma vasopressine spiegels bij opgenomen patienten met een depressie21eVoorjaarscongres,NedelandseVerenigingvoorPsychiatrie,Lunteren1994LondenL.van,LoosMLMvander,GoekoopJG,KempenGMJvan,DeWiedD,RooijmansHGM

Lamotrigine as add-on to lithium in bipolar depressionMLMvanderLoos,EVieta,WANolen28-5-2007SanDiego,AmericanPsychiatricAssociation

161161Curriculum Vitae M.L.M. van der Loos

Lamotrigine as add-on to lithium in bipolar depression followed by open label paroxetine addition in non-respondersMLMvanderLoos,EVieta,WANolen8-6-2007Pittsburg,InternationalSocietyofBipolarDisorders

Boekhoofdstukken

Handboek Bipolaire StoornissenRed:.RalphKupka,EliseKnoppert-vanderKlein,WillemNolenUitgeverijdeTijdstroomHoofdstuk14AnticonvulsivaErwinHartong,MarcvanderLoos,WillemNolen

Bipolar Psychopharmacotherapy; Caring for the patient, second editionRed.HagopS.Akiskal,MauricioTohenChapter4:PharmalogicalprofileandclinicalutilityoflamotrigineinmooddisordersM.L.M.vanderLoos,JosephR.Calabrese,WillemA.Nolen,DavidJ.Muzina

The essentials of psychopharmacology, third edition (in press)Red:Dr.SchatzbergandDr.NemeroffChapter:LamotrigineDavidE.Kemp,MarcvanderLoos,KemingGao,JosephR.Calabrese

163

Dankwoord

164164

Dankwoord (Acknowledgments)

Nanegenjaarishetmoeilijkomiedereenpersoonlijktebedankendieaanditprojecthebbenmeegewerkt.Vandaardatditdankwoordeerdereensamenvattinggenoemdmoetworden.

WillemNolenwasdegenedieaandewiegvanditonderzoekheeftgestaan.Toenikin2002solliciteerdenaardefunctievan‘hoofdonderzoeker’voorzaghijtweemogelijkeproblemen.Demogelijkheidvangeenofonvoldoenderesultatendoortegeringeinclusiewasheteerstemogelijkeobstakel.Doordesamenwerking,betrokkenheidenhetenthousiasmevanzowelpatiëntenalslokaleonderzoekersluktehetechternietalleenomvoldoendepatiëntenteincluderen,maarookomhetaantaluitvallersopmerkelijklaagtehouden.Mijnwaarderingvoormetnamedepatiëntendievaak68wekenlangaanallestudieproceduresmeewerktenisgroot. HettweedemogelijkeprobleemschoolvolgensWillemNoleninmijnonervarenheidalsonderzoekerenschrijvervanartikelen.DitprobleembleekechtermaarvangeringbelangtezijnomdatWillemnietalleeneenuitmuntendonderzoekerismaaromdathijinhetbespreken,corrigerenenuitleggeneenprofessorindewarezinvanhetwoordbleektezijn.Willem,hetiseenzeldzameengrotekwaliteitvanjouomstevigekritiektekunnenleverenzonderooitontmoedigendtezijn,meweer30jaarjongertelatenvoelenalsstudentzonderpatriarchaaltezijnenveeltebegeleidenzonderhetovertenemen.NooitreedikteruguitGroningenzondernieuwenthousiasmeeneengoedhumeur. DaaromWillem,zeerbedanktvoorjebegeleiding,steun,hulpenloyaliteit.Ditproefschrifthadernietzozeerandersuitgezienzonderjouwbegeleiding,hethadnooitbestaan.

HetwerkdatdoorManuelaTimmermansisgedaanverdiendzekermijngrotedank.WerkendvoorGSKzorgdejijvoordeorganisatievanhetprotocol,

165165Dankwoord

afsprakenmetonderzoekers,controleerdedata,organiseerde‘investigatormeetings’etc.Manuela,doorjouwhulpisditonderzoekvoormijgeenlogistiekenachtmerriegeworden.

PaulMulder,jouwilikgraagbedankenvoorhetgrotegeduldwaarmeejijmijdebasalestatistiekvoordezestudiewistuitteleggenzonderdatikeniginzichtindebenodigdecomputerprogramma’shad.Jouwgebrekaanopgewondenheidoverresultatenplaatstezowelmee-alstegenvallersvandeuitkomstendirectineengeheelanderlicht.Meestalineenwatgedemptereschakering.

DefinanciëleenorganisatorischesteunvanGSKmaaktedezestudiemogelijk.OoknahetaflopenvanhetpatentoplamotriginebleefGSKondersteuningbieden.Hiermeeisduidelijkgemaaktdatineengoedesamenwerkingtussenpatiënten,onderzoekersendefarmaceutischeindustrieervooriedereenvoordeelvalttebehalen.

DedirectievandeIsalaKliniekengafmijtijdvoorditprojectwaardoorhetmogelijkbleekomnaasthet‘gewonewerk’dezestudieopeengoedeentochnog‘socialewijze’afteronden.

DenauwkeurigheidenvolhardingwaarmeeJaapJansenenHenkHallie(UMCG)deenormehoeveelheiddataindedatabaseinvoerdenverdiendgrotedank.

Veelwaarderinggaatuitnaarmijntweecollega’sJanPieterSmitenDouweKromdijk.TemiddenvanbijtijdenwijleheftigeberoeringishetonstotnutoegeluktomonzegezamenlijkevisieopdeplaatsvandeziekenhuispsychiatrieindeIsalaKliniekenvormtegeven.Ikhoopvanhartedathetonsookindekomendejarenzalblijvenlukken.

166166

Inhetbeginvanmijndankwoordnoemdeikaldelokalemede-onderzoekers.Zijvormdenderuggengraatvandeze‘multicentretrial’enikwilgraagmijndankwoordeindigenmethunallenhiertenoemen:

R.W.J.Baas,MD,P.R.Bakker,MD,M.B.J.Blom,MD,W.Brouwer,MD,P.H.M.vanDongen,MD,D.M.H.vanHyfte,MD,K.Geling,MD,G.Glas,MDPhD,E.G.Th.M.Hartong,MDPhD,O.Habekotté,MD,A.Keegan,MD,H.deKeyzer,E.deJong,MD,E.A.M.Knoppert-vanderKlein,MDPhD,P.Kölling,MD,D.Koning,MD,A.G.Kunst,MD,R.W.Kupka,MDPhD,G.Kuut,MD,J.J.vanLieshout,MD,D.H.Kromdijk,MD,F.R.Kruisdijk,MD,E.vanLeeuwen,MD,M.deMaat,MD,M.vanNoorden,MD,P.J.H.Notten,MD,M.L.Luteijn,MD,P.Schoof,MD,J.M.J.F.Offermans,MD,D.Bloemkolk,MD,R.R.Ploeger,MD,J.Segeren,MD,S.Smit,MD,D.H.Postma,MD,M.J.W.T.Scherders,MD,A.C.M.Vergouwen,MDPhD,T.Vos,MD,J.vanZaane,MDinNederlandenEVieta,MDPhD,R.Arce,MD,L.Livianos,MD,A.González-Pinto,MDPhD,E.Álvarez,MDPhDinSpanje.

167167Dankwoord

university of groningen lamotrigine in bipolar depression ... · bipolar disorder (manic-depressive...

Documents