Subscribe Now!

Friday, 22 July 2011

New Antidepressant - Old Tricks

The past decade has been a bad one for antidepressant manufacturers.

Quite apart from all the bad press these drugs have been getting lately, there's been a remarkable lack of new antidepressants making it to the market. The only really novel drugs to hit the shelves since 2000 have been agomelatine and vilazodone. There were a couple of others that were just minor variants on old molecules, but that's it. Quite a contrast from the 1990s when new drugs were ten-a-penny.

This makes "Lu AA21004" rather special. It's a new antidepressant currently in development and by all accounts it's making good progress. It's now in Phase III trials, the last stage before approval. And a large clinical trial has just been published finding that it works.

But is it a medical advance or merely a commercial one?

Pharmacologically, Lu AA21004 is kind of a new twist on an old classic . Its main mechanism of action is inhibiting the reuptake of serotonin, just like Prozac and other SSRIs. However, unlike them, it also blocks serotonin 5HT3 and 5HT7 receptors, activates 5HT1A receptors and partially agonizes 5HT1B.

None of these things cry out "antidepressant" to me, but they do at least make it a bit different.

The new trial took 430 depressed people and randomized them to get Lu AA21004, at two different doses, 5mg or 10mg, or the older antidepressant venlafaxine at the high-ish dose of 225 mg, or placebo.

It worked. Over 6 weeks, people on the new drug improved more than those on placebo, and equally as well as people on venlafaxine; the lower 5 mg dose was a bit less effective, but not significantly so.

The size of the effect was medium, with a benefit over-and-above placebo of about 5 points on the MADRS depression scale, which considering that the baseline scores in this study averaged 34, is not huge, but it compares well to other antidepressant trials.

Now we come to the side effects, and this is the most important bit, as we'll see later. The authors did not specifically probe for these, they just relied on spontaneous report, which tends to underestimate adverse events.


Basically, the main problem with Lu AA21004 was that it made people sick. Literally - 9% of people on the highest dose suffered vomiting, and 38% got nausea. However, the 5 mg dose was no worse than venlafaxine for nausea, and was relatively vomit-free. Unlike venlafaxine, it didn't cause dry mouth, constipation, or sexual problems.

So that's lovely then. Let's get this stuff to market!

Hang on.

The big selling point for this drug is clearly the lack of side effects. It was no more effective than the (much cheaper, because off-patent) venlafaxine. It was better tolerated, but that's not a great achievement to be honest. Venlafaxine is quite notorious for causing side effects, especially at higher doses.

I take venlafaxine 300 mg and the side effects aren't the end of the world, but they're no fun, and the point is, they're well known to be worse than you get with other modern drugs, most notably SSRIs.

If you ask me, this study should have compared the new drug to an SSRI, because they're used much more widely than venlafaxine. Which one? How about escitalopram, a drug which is, according to most of the literature, one of the best SSRIs, as effective as venlafaxine, but with fewer side effects.

Actually, according to Lundbeck, who make escitalopram, it's even better than venlafaxine. Now, they would say that, given that they make it - but the makers of Lu AA21004 ought to believe them, because, er, they're the same people. "Lu" stands for Lundbeck.

The real competitor for this drug, according to Lundbeck, is escitalopram. But no-one wants to be in competition with themselves.

This may be why, although there are no fewer than 26 registered clinical trials of Lu AA21004 either ongoing or completed, only one is comparing it to an SSRI. The others either compare it to venlafaxine, or to duloxetine, which has even worse side effects. The one trial that will compare it to escitalopram has a narrow focus (sexual dysfunction).

Pharmacologically, remember, this drug is an SSRI with a few "special moves", in terms of hitting some serotonin receptors. The question is - do those extra tricks actually make it better? Or is it just a glorified, and expensive, new SSRI? We don't know and we're not going to find out any time soon.

If Lu AA21004 is no more effective, and no better tolerated, than tried-and-tested old escitalopram, anyone who buys it will be paying extra for no real benefit. The only winner, in that case, being Lundbeck - especially given that escitalopram goes off-patent in 2012...

ResearchBlogging.orgAlvarez E, Perez V, Dragheim M, Loft H, & Artigas F (2011). A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, active reference study of Lu AA21004 in patients with major depressive disorder. The International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology , 1-12 PMID: 21767441

16 comments:

usethebrainsgodgiveyou said...

Clap, clap, clap, clap...eh, good call!

Seems to be a good week for coming out of the chemical closet. Even "soma-tized" (ala BNW) the mind works exceedingly clearly.

Pedro said...

It seems that the only stuff really new is Agomelatine. As for second generation (SND)SRI I think sertraline and escitalopram are the best options.

Pietr Hitzig said...

Am I missing something? Why not go and compare it to citalopram which is off patent and dirt cheap?

Can anybody show me literature that supports the superiority of citalopram's S-enantiomer, escitalopram? Lundbeck has successfully gulled many a doctor into prescribing Lexapro rather than the racemic mixture.

Socrates said...

supports the superiority of citalopram's S-enantiomer, escitalopram

Is it because one's on patent, and the other, not?

Neuroskeptic said...

Pietr: Yeah, to clarify, I'm not saying escitalopram is or isn't better than citalopram. However Lundbeck certainly do claim that, which is why their decision not to use it as a comparison is "a bit odd". Except commercially.

Will:Power said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Will:Power said...

serotonergic antidepressants are getting a bit long in the tooth now. have a look at NMDA receptor antagonists. they can induce rapid remission in major depression symptoms within hours, as was first demonstrated with ketamine many years ago. the problem is finding one that is safe to take clinically. CP101-606 looks good, its an NMDAR-2B antagonist, i.e. blocks the GluN2B subunit, which is most abundant at extrasynaptic locations. therefore it preferentially blocks extrasynaptic NMDARs and doesn't disrupt synaptic NMDAR tone so much. rapid synapse formation rather than neurogenesis seems to underlie the antidepressant effects of NMDAR antagonists. a few references:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20724638
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21635931
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19011431
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21741771 (reviews all the evidence of NMDAR dysfunction in depression, and a hypothesis as to its etiology and pathogenesis)

Anonymous said...

How many unregistered trials with this LuLu medication have been conducted? Probably a zillion showing no effect beyond placebo.

Neuroskeptic said...

Anonymous: Well, if they've done unregistered trials in the US or Europe, they've broken the law. However there's no law that they have to publish those trials...

petrossa said...

Not to mention that escitalopram is citalopram with an inactive part chopped of the molecule.

I almost wanted to buy tinfoil when escitalopram came out. I'm still not convinced the branch in citalopram wasn't put there so it could be chopped of for rebranding.

The timing was that close for citalopram to run out and escitalopram to come in.

Anonymous said...

indipendent study had show that escitalopran is a deception!!!
It is equal citalopram.
My doctor tell to me that according to him citalopram is better than escitalopram becouse escitalopram is often anxiogenic.

Anonymous said...

Can someone explain to me why (beyond financial reasons) Atypicals continue to be pushed for normal "resistant" depression? Is the thinking that the D2 receptor, or more anxiety driven depressive symptoms are remediated in a portion of the depressed population?

The scariest thing I have witnessed the past decade was Atypicals being given to children, sometimes very young children, often for purely behavior control (make them sleepy) for kids not even diagnosed as bi-polar or psychotic. Hell, I have witnessed large numbers of kids in group homes being given this just to help counter-act the massive amounts of stimulants they were on.

It's really nice to see how big pharma quickly comes up with new off label usages when their patents run out, or they use chemical trickery to basically resell the exact same substance, claiming its different. Of course the best interest of the children is what Pharma really cares about, the billions in profits, and the smacks on the wrist--even for 100's of millions, doesn't come close to the profits--so viva de' bean counters eh?

Anonymous said...

Painkillers > SSRI's. That being said, exercise, healthy diet, volunteering, spirituality, positive relationships are probably better than every "drug" on the market.

Unfortunately, I don't see much changing in the next 100 years. There's new "hype" every week, but it usually ends up being nothing but news fluff.

Anonymous said...

Kappa Antagonists will be the new kid on the block as far a new mechanism of action and quite powerful for both treatment resistant depressives and generalized anxiety. Alkermenes ALKS (buprenorphine plus mu blocker to prevent addiction).

Anonymous said...

Or NMDA antagonist, IE Ketamine, which is showing very powerful neurogenesis and synapotgenesis.

Zoloft Lawsuit said...

Manufacturer of Zoloft is now looking at a Zoloft lawsuit due to several claims against the medication. Indeed the side effects of several antidepressants have made the screening process for new medications much harder to pass. This new formulation may still have the same side effects as its predecessors.