Major Depressive Disorder
Conditions
Keywords
depression, brain network activation, vortioxetine
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to explore patterns of Brain Network Activation (BNA) changes from baseline to endpoint on 1) efficacy of core symptoms of Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) and 2) improvement of cognitive dysfunction with acute treatment with flexible dose vortioxetine in adult outpatients with MDD and subjective complaints of cognitive dysfunction.
Detailed description
Vortioxetine is a novel antidepressant with hypothetical multimodal mechanism of action. It is thought to work through a combination of multiple pharmacological modes of action: 5-HT (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin) reuptake inhibition, 5-HT3 (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin) and 5-HT7 (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin) receptor antagonism, 5-HT1A (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin) receptor agonism, and 5-HT1B (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin) receptor partial agonism. In vivo nonclinical studies have demonstrated that vortioxetine enhances levels of the neurotransmitters 5-HT (hydroxytryptamine, or serotonin), norepinephrine (NE), dopamine (DA), acetylcholine and histamine in specific areas of the brain. These affinities are all considered to be of clinical relevance and involved in the mechanism of action at therapeutic doses. Vortioxetine has been shown to improve core depressive symptoms and improve cognitive function in adult outpatients with MDD and subjective complaints of cognitive function. This pilot study is intended to evaluate the extent to which BNA technology can provide clinically valuable information and provide information toward designing a subsequent confirmatory study that will further elucidate the effect of vortioxetine on MDD and cognitive function in this population. This exploratory study will ascertain the acute changes in core depression symptoms, cognitive function, tolerability, and safety using flexible-dose vortioxetine in adult outpatients with MDD with subjective complaints of cognitive functioning, as measured by BNA changes and standard outcome measures for depression and cognition. The study consists of 8 weeks of open-label treatment for MDD with response to treatment measured by standard research depression scales and BNA electroencephalogram (EEG) readings taken at certain points during the trial. An important aim in this study is to explore what correlations may exist between changes in measured brainwave patterns and reported change in depressive symptoms
Interventions
DRUGvortioxetine
Open-label vortioxetine
Sponsors
Takeda Pharmaceuticals North America, Inc.
ElMindA Ltd
Rush University Medical Center
Study design
Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
OTHER
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 65 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* The subject has single episode or recurrent MDD (acute onset of recurrence of recurrent MDD with poor inter-episode recovery) (inter-episode periods cannot meet full MDD criteria) as the primary diagnosis according to DSM-IV-TR criteria. The current major depressive episode (MDE) will be confirmed using the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI V6.0.0). * The subject has a MADRS total score ≥26. * Subject reports subjective cognitive dysfunction (such as difficulty concentrating, slow thinking, and difficulty in learning new things or remembering things). * The reported duration of the current MDE is at least 3 months and no longer than 24 months. * The subject is a man or woman between 18 and 65 years old, inclusive. * Right-handed, normal (corrected) vision, and normal hearing.
Exclusion criteria
* The subject has a score of ≥70 on the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) at the Baseline Visit. * Failure to respond to or inability to tolerate an adequate trial of vortioxetine in the past. * Exposure to an investigational compound 30 days prior to enrollment * Exposure to any psychoactive or otherwise excluded medication within five half-lives of the baseline visit or during the study. Excluded medications include: antidepressants, anxiolytics, anticonvulsants, barbiturates, chloral hydrate, lithium, antipsychotics, benzodiazepines, hypnotics, monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), muscle relaxers, triptans, centrally-acting antihistamines, central alpha-2 agonists, decongestants, psychostimulants, dopamine agonists, opioid pain medications, oral corticosteroids, L-methylfolate, S-adenosyl methionine (SAMe), 5-HTP (hydroxytryptophan), St. John's Wort, * The subject has 1 or more of the following: * Primary psychiatric disorder other than MDD as defined in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 4 Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) (as assessed by the MINI, Version 6.0.0). * Current or history of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), pervasive developmental disorder, manic or hypomanic episode, schizophrenia, or any other psychotic disorder, including major depression with psychotic features, mental retardation, organic mental disorders, or mental disorders due to a general medical condition as defined in the DSM-IV-TR. * Current diagnosis of alcohol or other substance abuse or dependence (excluding nicotine or caffeine) as defined in the DSM-IV-TR that has not been in sustained full remission for at least 6 months (for abuse) and 12 months (for dependence) prior to Screening. * Positive urine drug screen prior to Baseline. * Presence or history of a clinically significant neurological disorder (including epilepsy). * Neurodegenerative disorder (Alzheimer Disease, Parkinson Disease, multiple sclerosis, Huntington Disease, etc). * Any unstable medical condition as determined by the principal investigator (PI). * Any DSM-IV Axis II disorder that might compromise the study as determined by the PI. * The subject has any other disorder for which the treatment takes priority over treatment of MDD or is likely to interfere with study treatment or impair treatment compliance. * The subject has physical, cognitive, or language impairment of such severity as to adversely affect the validity of the data derived from the neuropsychological tests. * The subject has a significant risk of suicide according to the PI's clinical judgment. * The subject, in the opinion of the PI, poses a risk of harm to others. * The subject has initiated formal cognitive or behavioral therapy, systemic psychotherapy within less than 6 months of study screening, or has plans to initiate such therapy during the study. * The subject has received electroconvulsive therapy, vagus nerve stimulation, or repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation within 12 months prior to Screening. * The current MDE is considered by the PI to have been resistant to 2 adequate antidepressant treatments of at least 6 weeks duration each at the recommended dose. * The subject is pregnant or breastfeeding, or is intending to become pregnant before, during, or within 30 days after participating in this study.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change in Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) | from baseline to endpoint (up to 8 weeks) | The MADRS is a 10-item rating scale designed to assess the severity of symptoms of depression. Range is 0-60. Higher score means more severe. |
| Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Digital Symbol Substitution Test. | Baseline to endpoint (week 8) | Change in cognitive function defined as change from baseline to endpoint. The Digital Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) is a cognitive test designed to assess psychomotor speed of performance requiring visual perception, spatial decision-making and motor skills. The DSST consists of 133 digits and requires the subject to substitute each digit with a simple symbol in a 90-second period. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time (eg, 90 sec) is measured. It takes approximately 5 minutes to complete and score the DSST. |
| BNA Scores Amplitudes | Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks) | Brain Network Analytics (BNA) is a tool intended for the post-hoc statistical analysis of the human EEG, utilizing both resting-state EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) waveforms. The BNA algorithm compares a patient's ERP amplitudes and latencies to those of a large group of healthy, age-matched subjects in order to visualize and quantify changes in specific brain functions. The BNA algorithm was used to detect subjects' P200 and P300 ERP components from EEG data recorded during the AOB and VGNG tasks. BNA scores represent these ERP components in terms of amplitude (in microvolts) and latency (in milliseconds). |
| BNA Scores Latencies | Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks) | Brain Network Analytics (BNA) is a tool intended for the post-hoc statistical analysis of the human EEG, utilizing both resting-state EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) waveforms. The BNA algorithm compares a patient's ERP amplitudes and latencies to those of a large group of healthy, age-matched subjects in order to visualize and quantify changes in specific brain functions. The BNA algorithm was used to detect subjects' P200 and P300 ERP components from EEG data recorded during the AOB and VGNG tasks. BNA scores represent these ERP components in terms of amplitude (in microvolts) and latency (in milliseconds). |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks) | Pearson correlation was used to examine the associations between baseline BNA amplitude scores and outcomes including measures of MDD symptoms, cognitive function and functionality. |
| Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 17 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline to endpoint (week 8) | The HDRS is a clinician-rated used to rate the patient's depressive state. The 17 question version of the scale rates depressive state based on feelings of depression, guilt, suicidality, anxiety, agitation, somatic symptoms, level of insight, patterns of insomnia, loss of interest in work and other activities, weight loss, and hypochondriasis. Additionally, the 28 question version rates depersonalization, paranoia, obsessions/compulsions, hypersomnia, appetite increase, and psychomotor slowing. The total score is obtained by summing the score of each item, 0-4 (symptom is absent, mild, moderate, or severe) or 0-2 (absent, slight or trivial, clearly present). Scores can range from 0 to 54 for the 17 question version and 0 to 83 for the 28 question version. Scores between 0 and 6 do not indicate the presence of depression, scores between 7 and 17 indicate mild depression, scores between 18 and 24 indicate moderate depression, and scores over 24 indicate severe depression. |
| Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks) | Pearson correlation was used to examine the associations between baseline BNA latency scores and outcomes including measures of MDD symptoms, cognitive function and functionality. |
| Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 28 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline to endpoint (week 8) | The HDRS is a clinician-rated used to rate the patient's depressive state. The 17 question version of the scale rates depressive state based on feelings of depression, guilt, suicidality, anxiety, agitation, somatic symptoms, level of insight, patterns of insomnia, loss of interest in work and other activities, weight loss, and hypochondriasis. Additionally, the 28 question version rates depersonalization, paranoia, obsessions/compulsions, hypersomnia, appetite increase, and psychomotor slowing. The total score is obtained by summing the score of each item, 0-4 (symptom is absent, mild, moderate, or severe) or 0-2 (absent, slight or trivial, clearly present). Scores can range from 0 to 54 for the 17 question version and 0 to 83 for the 28 question version. Scores between 0 and 6 do not indicate the presence of depression, scores between 7 and 17 indicate mild depression, scores between 18 and 24 indicate moderate depression, and scores over 24 indicate severe depression. |
| Changes in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline to endpoint (week 8) | The QIDS-16-SR is a 16-item self-rated assessment of the severity of depressive symptoms. The assessments can be used to screen for depression, although they have been used predominantly as measures of symptom severity. The nine domains comprise 1) sad mood; 2) concentration; 3) self-criticism; 4) suicidal ideation; 5) interest; 6) energy/fatigue; 7) sleep disturbance (initial, middle, and late insomnia or hypersomnia); 8) decrease or increase in appetite or weight; and 9) psychomotor agitation or retardation. The total score ranges from 0 to 27 with higher scores equating to more severe symptomatology. The seven day period prior to assessment is the usual time frame for assessing symptom severity. |
| Changes in Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline to endpoint (week 8) | The CGI-S assesses the clinician's impression of the subject's current mental illness state (considering their total clinical experience with this particular population) via 7 point scale (ranging from 1-7) with higher scores equating to more symptoms. For example, a score of 1 = normal, not at all ill and a score of 7 = severely ill. |
Countries
United States
Participant flow
Recruitment details
Subjects were recruited from several sources, including referrals, advertisements and following completion of another clinical trial.
Pre-assignment details
Participants were screened over a 1-2 week period to assess inclusion/exclusion criteria (i.e., to obtain lab results, to ensure adequate washout of any prohibited concomitant medications, etc).
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Vortioxetine vortioxetine 5-20 mg/day | 25 |
| Total | 25 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 |
|---|---|---|
| 8-week Open-Label Treatment Phase | Lost to Follow-up | 2 |
| 8-week Open-Label Treatment Phase | Withdrawal by Subject | 1 |
| Screening | Lost to Follow-up | 2 |
| Screening | Protocol Violation | 3 |
| Screening | Withdrawal by Subject | 1 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Vortioxetine |
|---|---|
| Age, Categorical <=18 years | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical >=65 years | 0 Participants |
| Age, Categorical Between 18 and 65 years | 25 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 3 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 22 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants |
| Major Depressive Disorder-single or recurrent Recurrent episode | 19 participants |
| Major Depressive Disorder-single or recurrent Single episode | 6 participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 2 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 6 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 0 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 17 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 25 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 15 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 10 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk |
|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 0 / 25 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 9 / 25 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 0 / 25 |
Outcome results
Primary
BNA Scores Amplitudes
Brain Network Analytics (BNA) is a tool intended for the post-hoc statistical analysis of the human EEG, utilizing both resting-state EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) waveforms. The BNA algorithm compares a patient's ERP amplitudes and latencies to those of a large group of healthy, age-matched subjects in order to visualize and quantify changes in specific brain functions. The BNA algorithm was used to detect subjects' P200 and P300 ERP components from EEG data recorded during the AOB and VGNG tasks. BNA scores represent these ERP components in terms of amplitude (in microvolts) and latency (in milliseconds).
Time frame: Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks)
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P200 amplitude Baseline | 4.04 microvolts | Standard Deviation 2.6 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P200 amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.96 microvolts | Standard Deviation 2.31 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P3a amplitude Baseline | 9.43 microvolts | Standard Deviation 5 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P3a amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 7.13 microvolts | Standard Deviation 4.1 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P3b amplitude Baseline | 6.48 microvolts | Standard Deviation 3.69 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | AOB P3b amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 6.75 microvolts | Standard Deviation 4.3 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | VGNG P200 amplitude Baseline | 3.40 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.37 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | VGNG P200 amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.66 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | VGNG P3a amplitude Baseline | 3.33 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Amplitudes | VGNG P3a amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.55 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.77 |
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P200 (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.61Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3a (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.288Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3b (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.134Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P200 (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.083Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P3a (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.034Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P200 baseline scoresp-value: 0.031Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3a (amplitude) baseline scoresp-value: 0.5Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3b baseline scoresp-value: 0.185Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P200 baseline scoresp-value: 0.659Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P3a baseline scoresp-value: 0.611Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and MADRS (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.671Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and MADRS (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.931Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and MADRS (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.155Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and MADRS (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.297Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and MADRS (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.494Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and DSST (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.811Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and DSST (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.877Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and DSST (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.557Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and DSST (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.5Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and DSST (baseline to endpoint percent change)p-value: 0.297Pearson's correlation
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P200 amplitudes at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.575ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P200 amplitudes at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.541ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3a amplitudes at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.912ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3a amplitudes at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.214ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3b amplitudes at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.504ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3b amplitudes at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.546ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P200 amplitudes at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.895ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P200 amplitudes at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.673ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P3a amplitudes at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.27ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P3a amplitudes at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.837ANCOVA
Primary
BNA Scores Latencies
Brain Network Analytics (BNA) is a tool intended for the post-hoc statistical analysis of the human EEG, utilizing both resting-state EEG and event-related potentials (ERP) waveforms. The BNA algorithm compares a patient's ERP amplitudes and latencies to those of a large group of healthy, age-matched subjects in order to visualize and quantify changes in specific brain functions. The BNA algorithm was used to detect subjects' P200 and P300 ERP components from EEG data recorded during the AOB and VGNG tasks. BNA scores represent these ERP components in terms of amplitude (in microvolts) and latency (in milliseconds).
Time frame: Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks)
Population: These correlation analyses were done only on participants in the vortioxetine arm and did not include the group of healthy controls
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P3a latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 281.38 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 40.63 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P200 latency Baseline | 177.37 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 12.66 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P200 latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 177.90 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 14.12 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P3a latency Baseline | 308.47 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 50.93 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P3b latency Baseline | 370.07 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 55.87 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | AOB P3b latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 367.27 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 37.59 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | VGNG P200 latency Baseline | 170.35 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 14.05 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | VGNG P200 latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 172.11 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 16.35 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | VGNG P3a latency Baseline | 433.75 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 24.91 |
| Vortioxetine | BNA Scores Latencies | VGNG P3a latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 431.44 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 32.36 |
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P200 (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.143Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3b (latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.5Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3b (latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.337Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P200 (latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.832Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P3a (latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.68Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P200 (Latency) baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.777Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3a (Latency) baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.834Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and AOB P3b (Latency) baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.988Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P200 (Latency) baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.788Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between DSST and VGNG P3a (Latency) baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.168Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P200 (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.108Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3a (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.124Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3b (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.185Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P200 (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.923Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P3a (Latency) baseline scoresp-value: 0.77Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P200 (Latency) baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.712Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3a (Latency) baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.845Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and AOB P3b (Latency) baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.616Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P200 (Latency) baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.323Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between MADRS and VGNG P3a (Latency) baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.473Pearson's correlation
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P200 latencies at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.031ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P200 latencies at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.281ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3a latencies at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.966ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3a latencies at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.048ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3b latencies at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.005ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' AOB P3b latencies at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.101ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P200 latencies at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.373ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P200 latencies at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.183ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P3a latencies at baseline.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.475ANCOVA
Comparison: A comparison between vortioxetine arm patients' and healthy controls' VGNG P3a latencies at Endpoint.~The healthy control group subjects have been previously documented in NCT02418208 (Clinical trials of the Rockies, Inc. Denver, Colorado, US and Clinical Research Center of Nevada Las Vegas, Nevada, US ) and in NCT02875496 (The Villages Health, The Villages, Florida, US).p-value: 0.645ANCOVA
Primary
Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Digital Symbol Substitution Test.
Change in cognitive function defined as change from baseline to endpoint. The Digital Symbol Substitution Test (DSST) is a cognitive test designed to assess psychomotor speed of performance requiring visual perception, spatial decision-making and motor skills. The DSST consists of 133 digits and requires the subject to substitute each digit with a simple symbol in a 90-second period. The number of correct symbols within the allowed time (eg, 90 sec) is measured. It takes approximately 5 minutes to complete and score the DSST.
Time frame: Baseline to endpoint (week 8)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Digital Symbol Substitution Test. | Baseline | 48.24 number of correct symbols within 90 sec |
| Vortioxetine | Change From Baseline to Endpoint in Digital Symbol Substitution Test. | Endpoint (week 8) | 55.55 number of correct symbols within 90 sec |
p-value: 0.012Paired t-test
Primary
Change in Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
The MADRS is a 10-item rating scale designed to assess the severity of symptoms of depression. Range is 0-60. Higher score means more severe.
Time frame: from baseline to endpoint (up to 8 weeks)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Change in Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) | Baseline | 33.28 score on a scale |
| Vortioxetine | Change in Montgomery and Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) | Week 8 | 16.23 score on a scale |
p-value: <0.001Paired t-test
Secondary
Changes in Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint
The CGI-S assesses the clinician's impression of the subject's current mental illness state (considering their total clinical experience with this particular population) via 7 point scale (ranging from 1-7) with higher scores equating to more symptoms. For example, a score of 1 = normal, not at all ill and a score of 7 = severely ill.
Time frame: Baseline to endpoint (week 8)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline | 4.88 score on a scale |
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI-S) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Endpoint (week 8) | 2.64 score on a scale |
p-value: <0.001Paired t-test
Secondary
Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 17 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint
The HDRS is a clinician-rated used to rate the patient's depressive state. The 17 question version of the scale rates depressive state based on feelings of depression, guilt, suicidality, anxiety, agitation, somatic symptoms, level of insight, patterns of insomnia, loss of interest in work and other activities, weight loss, and hypochondriasis. Additionally, the 28 question version rates depersonalization, paranoia, obsessions/compulsions, hypersomnia, appetite increase, and psychomotor slowing. The total score is obtained by summing the score of each item, 0-4 (symptom is absent, mild, moderate, or severe) or 0-2 (absent, slight or trivial, clearly present). Scores can range from 0 to 54 for the 17 question version and 0 to 83 for the 28 question version. Scores between 0 and 6 do not indicate the presence of depression, scores between 7 and 17 indicate mild depression, scores between 18 and 24 indicate moderate depression, and scores over 24 indicate severe depression.
Time frame: Baseline to endpoint (week 8)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 17 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline | 23.76 score on a scale |
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 17 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Endpoint (week 8) | 11.59 score on a scale |
p-value: <0.001Paired t-test
Secondary
Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 28 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint
The HDRS is a clinician-rated used to rate the patient's depressive state. The 17 question version of the scale rates depressive state based on feelings of depression, guilt, suicidality, anxiety, agitation, somatic symptoms, level of insight, patterns of insomnia, loss of interest in work and other activities, weight loss, and hypochondriasis. Additionally, the 28 question version rates depersonalization, paranoia, obsessions/compulsions, hypersomnia, appetite increase, and psychomotor slowing. The total score is obtained by summing the score of each item, 0-4 (symptom is absent, mild, moderate, or severe) or 0-2 (absent, slight or trivial, clearly present). Scores can range from 0 to 54 for the 17 question version and 0 to 83 for the 28 question version. Scores between 0 and 6 do not indicate the presence of depression, scores between 7 and 17 indicate mild depression, scores between 18 and 24 indicate moderate depression, and scores over 24 indicate severe depression.
Time frame: Baseline to endpoint (week 8)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 28 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline | 28.44 score on a scale |
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) 28 From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Endpoint (week 8) | 14.77 score on a scale |
p-value: <0.001Paired t-test
Secondary
Changes in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint
The QIDS-16-SR is a 16-item self-rated assessment of the severity of depressive symptoms. The assessments can be used to screen for depression, although they have been used predominantly as measures of symptom severity. The nine domains comprise 1) sad mood; 2) concentration; 3) self-criticism; 4) suicidal ideation; 5) interest; 6) energy/fatigue; 7) sleep disturbance (initial, middle, and late insomnia or hypersomnia); 8) decrease or increase in appetite or weight; and 9) psychomotor agitation or retardation. The total score ranges from 0 to 27 with higher scores equating to more severe symptomatology. The seven day period prior to assessment is the usual time frame for assessing symptom severity.
Time frame: Baseline to endpoint (week 8)
Population: 25 subjects were included in the baseline analysis, and 22 subjects completed all visits and were included in subsequent analyses
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Baseline | 16.24 score on a scale |
| Vortioxetine | Changes in Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology - Self-Report (QIDS-16-SR) From Baseline to 8 Week Endpoint | Endpoint (week 8) | 7.91 score on a scale |
p-value: <0.001Paired t-test
Secondary
Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores
Pearson correlation was used to examine the associations between baseline BNA amplitude scores and outcomes including measures of MDD symptoms, cognitive function and functionality.
Time frame: Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks)
Population: These correlation analyses were done only on participants in the vortioxetine arm and did not include the group of healthy controls
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P200 amplitude Baseline | 4.04 microvolts | Standard Deviation 2.6 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P200 amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.96 microvolts | Standard Deviation 2.31 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3a amplitude Baseline | 9.43 microvolts | Standard Deviation 5 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3a amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 7.13 microvolts | Standard Deviation 4.1 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3b amplitude Baseline | 6.48 microvolts | Standard Deviation 3.69 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3b amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 6.75 microvolts | Standard Deviation 4.3 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P200 amplitude Baseline | 3.40 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.37 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P200 amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.66 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.53 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P3a amplitude Baseline | 3.33 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.6 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Amplitude Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P3a amplitude Endpoint (8 weeks) | 3.55 microvolts | Standard Deviation 1.77 |
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.015Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.859Pearson's correlation
Comparison: AOB P3a (amplitude)p-value: 0.451Pearson's correlation
Comparison: AOB P3b (amplitude)p-value: 0.957Pearson's correlation
Comparison: VGNG P200 (amplitude)p-value: 0.166Pearson's correlation
Comparison: VGNG P3a (amplitude)p-value: 0.105Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.601Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.421Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.316Pearson's correlation
p-value: 0.478Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.969Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.943Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.795Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.969Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.406Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.185Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.454Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.579Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.549Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.518Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.922Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.796Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.054Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.995Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.668Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.875Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.852Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.234Pearson's correlation
p-value: 0.056Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.248Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.507Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.841Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.508Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.916Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.147Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.225Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.868Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.537Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.195Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.972Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.785Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.646Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.182Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.069Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.068Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.929Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.802Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.153Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.298Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.996Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.531Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.21Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.899Pearson's correlation
p-value: 0.087Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.087Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (amplitude) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.55Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (amplitude) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.766Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (amplitude) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.498Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (amplitude) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.599Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (amplitude) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.064Pearson's correlation
Secondary
Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores
Pearson correlation was used to examine the associations between baseline BNA latency scores and outcomes including measures of MDD symptoms, cognitive function and functionality.
Time frame: Baseline to Endpoint (8 weeks)
Population: These correlation analyses were done only on participants in the vortioxetine arm and did not include the group of healthy controls
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P3a latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 431.44 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 32.36 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P200 latency Baseline | 177.37 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 12.66 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P200 latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 177.90 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 14.12 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3a latency Baseline | 308.47 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 50.93 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3a latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 281.38 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 40.63 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3b latency Baseline | 370.07 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 55.87 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | AOB P3b latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 367.27 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 37.59 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P200 latency Baseline | 170.35 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 14.05 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P200 latency Endpoint (8 weeks) | 172.11 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 16.35 |
| Vortioxetine | Correlations Between BNA Latency Scores and Clinical, Cognitive, and Functionality Assessments Using Baseline Scores | VGNG P3a latency Baseline | 433.75 milliseconds | Standard Deviation 24.91 |
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.764Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.881Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.279Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.039Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.94Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline scoresp-value: 0.65Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.34Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.819Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.4Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.278Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and HDRS-28 baseline to endpoint percentage changep-value: 0.614Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.999Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.491Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.028Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.9Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline scoresp-value: 0.55Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.373Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.949Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.754Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.4990.176
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and HDRS-17 baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.549Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.617Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.722Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.371Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline scoresp-value: 0.34Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.57Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.434Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.569Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.005Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and QIDS-SR baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.698Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.774Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and PDQ baseline scorep-value: 0.024Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.603Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.326Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and PDQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.68Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.774Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.024Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.603Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.326Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and PDQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.68Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.692Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.059Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.227Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.6Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.69Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.315Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.996Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.544Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.066Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and MGH-CPFQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.293Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.013Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.799Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.201Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.586Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and WLQ baseline scoresp-value: 0.95Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P200 (latency) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.92Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3a (latency) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.831Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between AOB P3b (latency) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.23Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P200 (latency) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.115Pearson's correlation
Comparison: Correlation between VGNG P3a (latency) and WLQ baseline to endpoint percent changep-value: 0.45Pearson's correlation