Skip to content

Brexpiprazole (OPC-34712) as an Adjunctive Treatment in Adults With Major Depressive Disorder and Anxiety Symptoms

Protocol 331-13-002: An Exploratory, Multicenter, Open-label, Flexible-dose Trial of Brexpiprazole (OPC-34712) as an Adjunctive Treatment in Adults With Major Depressive Disorder and Anxiety Symptoms

Status
Completed
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02013531
Enrollment
37
Registered
2013-12-17
Start date
2013-11-30
Completion date
2014-06-30
Last updated
2016-03-29

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Anxiety, Major Depressive Disorder

Keywords

schizophrenia, Major depressive disorder, Anxiety Symptoms, Mental Disorders, Psychotic Disorders, emotional withdrawal, antipsychotic

Brief summary

The purpose of this study is to investigate the efficacy and safety of flexibly dosed adjunctive brexpiprazole treatment in subjects with major depressive disorder and anxiety symptoms, who are experiencing an inadequate selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI)/serotonin norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (SNRI) response.

Interventions

DRUGBrexpiprazole

Treatment (6 weeks) - Up to 3mg/day, once daily dose, tablets, orally

Sponsors

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY
Otsuka Pharmaceutical Development & Commercialization, Inc.
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Main Inclusion Criteria: * Have a diagnosis of a single or recurrent, nonpsychotic episode of MDD as defined by the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) and confirmed by both the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (M.I.N.I.) and an adequate clinical psychiatric evaluation. * Have a treatment history of an inadequate ADT response to at least 1 ADT (but not \> 3) for the current episode. * Have received a single, trial-approved, SSRI or SNRI at an adequate dose for ≥ 6 weeks prior to screening. * Are 18 to 65 years old at the time of consent (inclusive, and outpatients only). * Have a Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D)-17-item Total Score ≥ 18 at screening and baseline. * Have a Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Total Score ≥ 20 at screening and baseline. Main

Exclusion criteria

Subjects with any of the following current Axis I DSM-IV-TR diagnoses: * delirium * dementia * amnestic * other cognitive disorders * schizophrenia * schizoaffective disorder * other psychotic disorders * bipolar I disorder, * bipolar II disorder * bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) * eating disorders * anorexia nervosa * bulimia * obsessive compulsive disorder * post-traumatic stress disorder Subjects with any of the following current Axis II DSM-IV-TR diagnoses: * borderline, antisocial * paranoid * schizoid * schizotypal * histrionic personality disorders * mental retardation.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The MADRS is utilized as the primary efficacy assessment of a participant's level of depression. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, with higher values indicating worse outcome.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Mean Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 6.Baseline, Week 6The improvement of each participants condition was rated for each participant using the CGI-I. The study physician rated the participants total improvement whether or not it was due entirely to drug treatment. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Compared to his/her condition at baseline, how much has the participant changed? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The response at a given week was compared with the participants condition at Baseline prior to the first dose of study medication.
Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 1 to Week 6The improvement of each participants condition was rated for each participant using the CGI-I. The study physician rated the participants total improvement whether or not it was due entirely to drug treatment. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Compared to his/her condition at baseline, how much has the participant changed? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The response at a given week was compared with the participants condition at Baseline prior to the first dose of study medication.
Percentage of Participants With a MADRS ResponseWeek 6MADRS response rate, where response is defined as ≥ 50% reduction in respective total scores from Baseline to Week 6. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, higher values indicate worse outcome.
Percentage of Participants With a MADRS RemissionWeek 6MADRS remission rate, where remission is defined as MADRS Total Score ≤ 10 and 50% reduction in MADRS Total Score from Baseline to Week 6. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, higher values indicate worse outcome.
Mean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The HAM-D17 was utilized as an assessment of a participants level of depression and was administered utilizing the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (SIGH-D). Detailed instructions for administration of this structured interview were provided in the SIGH-D. The HAM-D17 was administered at the following visits: screening, Baseline, and Week 6/ Early termination (ET). HAM-D17 is a 17-item questionnaire with a total score of 0 to 52 with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.
Mean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The HAM-A was utilized for the evaluation of anxiety symptoms and was administered using the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A). Detailed instructions for administration of this structured interview were provided in the SIGH-A. The HAM-A was administered at the following visits: screening, Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6/ET. HAM-A is a 14-item scale with each item is scored on a scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (very severe) with a total score of 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating severe anxiety symptoms.
Mean Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Mean ScoreBaseline, Week 6The SDS was a self-rated instrument used to measure the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school, social life, and family/home responsibilities. The SDS was a visual analogue scale that used spatio-visual, numeric, and verbal descriptive anchors simultaneously to assess disability across the 3 domains. The number most representative of how much each area was disrupted by symptoms was marked along the line from 0 = not at all to 10 = extremely. Scores of 5 and above were associated with significant functional impairment. The three items may be summed into a single dimensional measure of global functional impairment that ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).
Mean Change From Baseline in Massachusetts General Hospital-Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (MGH-CPFQ) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The MGH-CPFQ was a participant-rated scale designed to assess cognitive and executive dysfunction including symptoms of fatigue in mood and anxiety disorders. The MGH-CPFQ consisted of 7 items, each rated on a scale from 1 (greater than normal functioning) to 6 (poorer than normal functioning). The total score of the 7 items ranged from 7 to 42, with higher scores indicative of a worse outcome. The MGH-CPFQ was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.
Mean Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The severity of illness for each participant was rated using the CGI-S. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the participant at this time? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = normal, not at all ill; 2 = borderline mentally ill; 3 = mildly ill; 4 = moderately ill; 5 = markedly ill; 6 = severely ill; and 7 = among the most extremely ill participants.
Mean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for P-inhibition FailuresBaseline, Week 6Executive function and working memory were assessed for the Go/No-go Task using computer-based and paper-pencil neuropsychological instruments. These instruments focused on measuring impulse inhibition. The instrument was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.
Mean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for Mean Reaction TimeBaseline, Week 6Executive function and working memory were assessed for the Go/No-go Task using computer-based and paper-pencil neuropsychological instruments. These instruments focused on measuring impulse inhibition. The instrument was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.
Mean Change From Baseline in Delay Discounting Task - Monetary Choice Questionnaire (MCQ) ScoreBaseline, Week 6Delay discounting was a participant-completed task is an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. The propensity of participants to delay reward was assessed with an MCQ. Discounting rate is estimated using, k= (A/V)1/D, where k is the discounting rate parameter, V is the immediate reward, A is the higher delayed reward and D is the amount of days to the delayed reward. The MCQ consists of 27 choices between immediate and delayed rewards. The participant chooses repeatedly between 2 hypothetical sums of money: a smaller amount now or a larger amount in the future (for example, would you prefer $27 today or $50 in 21 days?) The answers provide an estimate of the participant's discounting rate; higher discounting rates indicate greater impulsivity. A total score is not computed for all 27 questions.
Mean Change From Baseline in Delay and Probability Discounting Task (DPDT) ScoresBaseline, Week 6The experiential discounting task (EDT) was a subject-completed computerized task designed to measure delay discounting, an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. The participant chose between different amounts of money available at different delays or with different chances (probability to get the money). At the end of the session, one of the choices was selected at random, and the participant received whatever they chose in response of that question (immediate, delayed, or probabilistic amount). Formula for h-value: value = A / (1 + hO) p is probability of reward and O is odds against. The value of h indicates how the value of a reward and the probability of its occurrence decreases. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting and higher probability discounting shows greater impulsivity). A total score is not computed for this task.
Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in the Number of Impulsive Choices in the Delayed Reward Task (DRT)Baseline, Week 6Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. During a training session, a single button with letter A or B appeared on the screen. The participant had to wait until the letter began to flash, and press the button only once. An amount of money was added to a counter and another single button appeared. During the test session, both buttons with letters A and B appeared on the screen. The participant had to choose one of the letters that remained; the other disappeared. The participant had to wait until the letter began to flash and then press the button again. An amount of money was added to the counter, and both letters appeared again. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). A total score was not calculated for this task.
Mean Change From Baseline in Food Delay Discounting TaskBaseline, Week 6Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. The participant chooses between a reward they could have today and another that they could get after a specified amount of time. The participant would not receive the rewards, but was asked to make decisions as though he or she were really going to receive them. AUC is defined as area under the concentration-time curve; AUC for food is presented below. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). To calculate the AUC, the X-axis is days, Y-axis is Food value, the actual area underneath the curve was calculated by summing the results for each delay and present value pair: x2 -x1\[(y1 + y2)/2\], where x1 and x2 are successive delays and y1 and y2 are the present values associated with those delays. The AUC can range from 1 (no discounting) to 0 (maximum discounting).
Mean Change From Baseline in Money Delay Discounting TaskBaseline, Week 6Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. The participant chose between a reward they could have today and another that they could get after a specified amount of time. The participant would not receive the rewards, but was asked to make decisions as though he or she were really going to receive them. AUC is defined as area under the concentration-time curve; AUC for money is presented below. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). To calculate the AUC, the X-axis is days, Y-axis is Money value, the actual area underneath the curve was calculated by summing the results for each delay and present value pair: x2 -x1\[(y1 + y2)/2\], where x1 and x2 are successive delays and y1 and y2 are the present values associated with those delays. The AUC can range from 1 (no discounting) to 0 (maximum discounting).
Mean Change From Baseline in Barratt Impulsiveness Scale 11-item (BIS-11) Total ScoreBaseline, Week 6The BIS-11 was a participant-rated scale designed to assess impulsive personality traits. The BIS-11 consisted of 30 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (rarely/never) to 4 (almost always/always). The scores provided information to assess 6 first-order factors (attention, motor, self-control, cognitive complexity, perseverance, and cognitive instability impulsiveness) and 3 second-order factors (motor impulsiveness, non-planning impulsiveness, and attentional impulsiveness). The total score ranged from 30 to 120, with higher scores indicating impulsive personality traits. The BIS-11 was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.
Mean Change From Baseline in Kellner Symptom Questionnaire (KSQ)Baseline, Week 6KSQ is a subject-rated scale designed to assess distress using symptoms of depression, anxiety, anger-hostility and somatization. The questionnaire contains 92 items of which 68 items indicate symptoms and 24 items are antonyms of some of the symptoms that indicate well-being. The maximum score for each symptom subscale is 17, the well-being subscales 6 and for the total scale scores 23. A higher score indicates more distress than a lower score. The total subscale scores will be unevaluable if less than 19 of the 23 items are recorded. If 19 to 22 of the 23 items are recorded, the total subscale score is the mean of the recorded items multiplied by 23 and then rounded to the first decimal place. The total score will be unevaluable if less than 76 of the 92 items are recorded. If 76 to 91 of the 92 items and no less than 19 of the 23 items of each subscale are recorded, the total score will be the mean of the recorded items multiplied by 92 and then rounded to the first decimal place.

Countries

United States

Participant flow

Recruitment details

This trial was conducted in 37 participants. 18 trial sites were initiated in the United Sates, and 12 trial sites enrolled participants.

Pre-assignment details

The trial consisted of a 2- to 21-day screening phase, a 6-week (42-day) treatment phase, and a 30-day (+ 2) follow-up phase.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Brexpiprazole
Participants were administered oral brexpiprazole tablets of 0.5 mg/day with titration up to 3 mg/day QD in addition to their constant-dose ADT for 6 weeks.
37
Total37

Withdrawals & dropouts

PeriodReasonFG000
Overall StudyLost to Follow-up3
Overall StudyMet Withdrawal Criteria1
Overall StudyWithdrawal by Subject1

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicBrexpiprazole
Age, Continuous45.7 Years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15.2
Sex: Female, Male
Female
26 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
— / —
other
Total, other adverse events
28 / 37
serious
Total, serious adverse events
1 / 37

Outcome results

Primary

Mean Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score

The MADRS is utilized as the primary efficacy assessment of a participant's level of depression. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, with higher values indicating worse outcome.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid Baseline and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. A mixed model repeated measures (MMRM) analysis was performed.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) Total Score-19.6 Units on a scaleStandard Error 1.5
Comparison: The null hypothesis of zero in mean change from Baseline in the MADRS total score at Week 6 was tested at a significance level of 0.05. Because this was an exploratory trial, no methods to control type I error rate were performed.p-value: <0.0001Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Barratt Impulsiveness Scale 11-item (BIS-11) Total Score

The BIS-11 was a participant-rated scale designed to assess impulsive personality traits. The BIS-11 consisted of 30 items scored on a 4-point scale ranging from 1 (rarely/never) to 4 (almost always/always). The scores provided information to assess 6 first-order factors (attention, motor, self-control, cognitive complexity, perseverance, and cognitive instability impulsiveness) and 3 second-order factors (motor impulsiveness, non-planning impulsiveness, and attentional impulsiveness). The total score ranged from 30 to 120, with higher scores indicating impulsive personality traits. The BIS-11 was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Barratt Impulsiveness Scale 11-item (BIS-11) Total Score-7.67 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 10.14
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Delay and Probability Discounting Task (DPDT) Scores

The experiential discounting task (EDT) was a subject-completed computerized task designed to measure delay discounting, an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. The participant chose between different amounts of money available at different delays or with different chances (probability to get the money). At the end of the session, one of the choices was selected at random, and the participant received whatever they chose in response of that question (immediate, delayed, or probabilistic amount). Formula for h-value: value = A / (1 + hO) p is probability of reward and O is odds against. The value of h indicates how the value of a reward and the probability of its occurrence decreases. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting and higher probability discounting shows greater impulsivity). A total score is not computed for this task.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Delay and Probability Discounting Task (DPDT) ScoresDelay discounting task k value-3.586888 unitlessStandard Deviation 15.156644
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Delay and Probability Discounting Task (DPDT) ScoresProbability discouting task h value3.505900 unitlessStandard Deviation 28.036537
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Delay Discounting Task - Monetary Choice Questionnaire (MCQ) Score

Delay discounting was a participant-completed task is an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. The propensity of participants to delay reward was assessed with an MCQ. Discounting rate is estimated using, k= (A/V)1/D, where k is the discounting rate parameter, V is the immediate reward, A is the higher delayed reward and D is the amount of days to the delayed reward. The MCQ consists of 27 choices between immediate and delayed rewards. The participant chooses repeatedly between 2 hypothetical sums of money: a smaller amount now or a larger amount in the future (for example, would you prefer $27 today or $50 in 21 days?) The answers provide an estimate of the participant's discounting rate; higher discounting rates indicate greater impulsivity. A total score is not computed for all 27 questions.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Delay Discounting Task - Monetary Choice Questionnaire (MCQ) Score-0.008442 unitlessStandard Deviation 0.0602
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Food Delay Discounting Task

Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. The participant chooses between a reward they could have today and another that they could get after a specified amount of time. The participant would not receive the rewards, but was asked to make decisions as though he or she were really going to receive them. AUC is defined as area under the concentration-time curve; AUC for food is presented below. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). To calculate the AUC, the X-axis is days, Y-axis is Food value, the actual area underneath the curve was calculated by summing the results for each delay and present value pair: x2 -x1\[(y1 + y2)/2\], where x1 and x2 are successive delays and y1 and y2 are the present values associated with those delays. The AUC can range from 1 (no discounting) to 0 (maximum discounting).

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Food Delay Discounting Task0.0371 unitlessStandard Deviation 0.1819
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for Mean Reaction Time

Executive function and working memory were assessed for the Go/No-go Task using computer-based and paper-pencil neuropsychological instruments. These instruments focused on measuring impulse inhibition. The instrument was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for Mean Reaction TimeMean reaction time (Go cues)-0.26 millisecondsStandard Deviation 52.49
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for Mean Reaction TimeMean reaction time (No-Go cues)-4.26 millisecondsStandard Deviation 51.69
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for P-inhibition Failures

Executive function and working memory were assessed for the Go/No-go Task using computer-based and paper-pencil neuropsychological instruments. These instruments focused on measuring impulse inhibition. The instrument was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for P-inhibition FailuresP-inhibition failures (Go cues)-0.0193 failuresStandard Deviation 0.2324
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Go/No-Go Task for P-inhibition FailuresP-inhibition failures (No-Go cues)-0.0103 failuresStandard Deviation 0.2337
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Total Score

The HAM-A was utilized for the evaluation of anxiety symptoms and was administered using the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (SIGH-A). Detailed instructions for administration of this structured interview were provided in the SIGH-A. The HAM-A was administered at the following visits: screening, Baseline, Weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6/ET. HAM-A is a 14-item scale with each item is scored on a scale from 0 (not present) to 4 (very severe) with a total score of 0 to 56, with higher scores indicating severe anxiety symptoms.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. A MMRM analysis was performed.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) Total Score-17.80 Units on a scaleStandard Error 1.23
Comparison: The null hypothesis of zero in Mean change from Baseline in HAM-A total score at Week 6 was tested at a significance level of 0.05. Because this was an exploratory trial, no methods to control type I error rate were performed.p-value: <0.0001Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) Total Score

The HAM-D17 was utilized as an assessment of a participants level of depression and was administered utilizing the Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (SIGH-D). Detailed instructions for administration of this structured interview were provided in the SIGH-D. The HAM-D17 was administered at the following visits: screening, Baseline, and Week 6/ Early termination (ET). HAM-D17 is a 17-item questionnaire with a total score of 0 to 52 with higher scores indicating more depressive symptoms.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D17) Total Score-15.85 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.37
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Kellner Symptom Questionnaire (KSQ)

KSQ is a subject-rated scale designed to assess distress using symptoms of depression, anxiety, anger-hostility and somatization. The questionnaire contains 92 items of which 68 items indicate symptoms and 24 items are antonyms of some of the symptoms that indicate well-being. The maximum score for each symptom subscale is 17, the well-being subscales 6 and for the total scale scores 23. A higher score indicates more distress than a lower score. The total subscale scores will be unevaluable if less than 19 of the 23 items are recorded. If 19 to 22 of the 23 items are recorded, the total subscale score is the mean of the recorded items multiplied by 23 and then rounded to the first decimal place. The total score will be unevaluable if less than 76 of the 92 items are recorded. If 76 to 91 of the 92 items and no less than 19 of the 23 items of each subscale are recorded, the total score will be the mean of the recorded items multiplied by 92 and then rounded to the first decimal place.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Kellner Symptom Questionnaire (KSQ)-29.43 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.88
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Massachusetts General Hospital-Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (MGH-CPFQ) Total Score

The MGH-CPFQ was a participant-rated scale designed to assess cognitive and executive dysfunction including symptoms of fatigue in mood and anxiety disorders. The MGH-CPFQ consisted of 7 items, each rated on a scale from 1 (greater than normal functioning) to 6 (poorer than normal functioning). The total score of the 7 items ranged from 7 to 42, with higher scores indicative of a worse outcome. The MGH-CPFQ was administered at the following visits: Baseline and Week 6/ET.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Massachusetts General Hospital-Cognitive and Physical Functioning Questionnaire (MGH-CPFQ) Total Score-9.85 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.79
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Money Delay Discounting Task

Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. The participant chose between a reward they could have today and another that they could get after a specified amount of time. The participant would not receive the rewards, but was asked to make decisions as though he or she were really going to receive them. AUC is defined as area under the concentration-time curve; AUC for money is presented below. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). To calculate the AUC, the X-axis is days, Y-axis is Money value, the actual area underneath the curve was calculated by summing the results for each delay and present value pair: x2 -x1\[(y1 + y2)/2\], where x1 and x2 are successive delays and y1 and y2 are the present values associated with those delays. The AUC can range from 1 (no discounting) to 0 (maximum discounting).

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Money Delay Discounting Task0.0707 unitlessStandard Deviation 0.2284
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Mean Score

The SDS was a self-rated instrument used to measure the effect of the participant's symptoms on work/school, social life, and family/home responsibilities. The SDS was a visual analogue scale that used spatio-visual, numeric, and verbal descriptive anchors simultaneously to assess disability across the 3 domains. The number most representative of how much each area was disrupted by symptoms was marked along the line from 0 = not at all to 10 = extremely. Scores of 5 and above were associated with significant functional impairment. The three items may be summed into a single dimensional measure of global functional impairment that ranges from 0 (unimpaired) to 30 (highly impaired).

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) Mean Score-3.62 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 2.6
Secondary

Mean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in the Number of Impulsive Choices in the Delayed Reward Task (DRT)

Delay discounting was a participant-completed task considered as an index of impulsive behavior. It measured the extent to which the value of a reward decreased as the delay to obtaining that reward increased. During a training session, a single button with letter A or B appeared on the screen. The participant had to wait until the letter began to flash, and press the button only once. An amount of money was added to a counter and another single button appeared. During the test session, both buttons with letters A and B appeared on the screen. The participant had to choose one of the letters that remained; the other disappeared. The participant had to wait until the letter began to flash and then press the button again. An amount of money was added to the counter, and both letters appeared again. The data are computerized and reflect delay discounting and impulsivity (higher discounting shows greater impulsivity). A total score was not calculated for this task.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change From Baseline to Week 6 in the Number of Impulsive Choices in the Delayed Reward Task (DRT)4.6 Number of Impulsive ChoicesStandard Deviation 18.1
Secondary

Mean Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Total Score

The severity of illness for each participant was rated using the CGI-S. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Considering your total clinical experience with this particular population, how mentally ill is the participant at this time? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed; 1 = normal, not at all ill; 2 = borderline mentally ill; 3 = mildly ill; 4 = moderately ill; 5 = markedly ill; 6 = severely ill; and 7 = among the most extremely ill participants.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. A MMRM analysis was performed.

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Change in Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) Total Score-2.2 Units on a scaleStandard Error 0.2
Comparison: Statistical analysis at Week 6.p-value: <0.0001Mixed Models Analysis
Secondary

Mean Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 6.

The improvement of each participants condition was rated for each participant using the CGI-I. The study physician rated the participants total improvement whether or not it was due entirely to drug treatment. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Compared to his/her condition at baseline, how much has the participant changed? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The response at a given week was compared with the participants condition at Baseline prior to the first dose of study medication.

Time frame: Baseline, Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (MEAN)Dispersion
BrexpiprazoleMean Clinical Global Impression-Improvement (CGI-I) Score at Week 6.1.9 Units on a scaleStandard Deviation 1.1
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Remission

MADRS remission rate, where remission is defined as MADRS Total Score ≤ 10 and 50% reduction in MADRS Total Score from Baseline to Week 6. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, higher values indicate worse outcome.

Time frame: Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With a MADRS Remission47.2 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With a MADRS Response

MADRS response rate, where response is defined as ≥ 50% reduction in respective total scores from Baseline to Week 6. The MADRS consists of 10 items, all rated on a 0 to 6 scale with 0 being the best rating and 6 being the worst rating. The MADRS Total Score is the sum of ratings for all 10 items. The possible Total scores are from 0 to 60, higher values indicate worse outcome.

Time frame: Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureValue (NUMBER)
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With a MADRS Response69.4 Percentage of participants
Secondary

Percentage of Participants With CGI-I Response Rate

The improvement of each participants condition was rated for each participant using the CGI-I. The study physician rated the participants total improvement whether or not it was due entirely to drug treatment. To perform this assessment, the study physician answered the following question: Compared to his/her condition at baseline, how much has the participant changed? Response choices included: 0 = not assessed, 1 = very much improved, 2 = much improved, 3 = minimally improved, 4 = no change, 5 = minimally worse, 6 = much worse, and 7 = very much worse. The response at a given week was compared with the participants condition at Baseline prior to the first dose of study medication.

Time frame: Week 1 to Week 6

Population: Participants took at least 1 dose of brexpiprazole and who had a valid baseline assessment and Post-Baseline efficacy assessment. The LOCF data set included data recorded at a scheduled treatment phase visit or, if no observation is recorded at that visit, data carried forward from the previous scheduled treatment phase visit.

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 675.0 percentage of participants
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 18.3 percentage of participants
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 236.1 percentage of participants
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 350.0 percentage of participants
BrexpiprazolePercentage of Participants With CGI-I Response RateWeek 466.7 percentage of participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 12, 2026