Post hoc analyses of asenapine treatment in pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder: efficacy related to mixed or manic episode, stage of illness, and body weight
Received 16 February 2018
Accepted for publication 6 June 2018
Published 2 August 2018 Volume 2018:14 Pages 1941—1952
Checked for plagiarism Yes
Review by Single anonymous peer review
Peer reviewer comments 2
Editor who approved publication: Dr Roger Pinder
Robert L Findling,1 Willie Earley,2 Trisha Suppes,3,4 Mehul Patel,2 Xiao Wu,2 Cheng-Tao Chang,2 Roger S McIntyre5
1Johns Hopkins University and the Kennedy Krieger Institute, Baltimore, MD, USA; 2Allergan, Madison, NJ, USA; 3VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, CA, USA; 4Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA; 5Toronto Western Research Institute, Toronto, ON, Canada
Background: Patient characteristics and disease progression may affect response to pharmacologic intervention in bipolar I disorder. Asenapine is approved for acute treatment of manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder in patients 10–17 years old. Post hoc analyses assessed asenapine efficacy in pediatric patients by current manic or mixed episode, number of lifetime episodes, and baseline body mass index (BMI).
Patients and methods: Data were obtained from a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial of asenapine 2.5, 5.0, or 10.0 mg twice daily (BID) in male or female patients (10–17 years) with bipolar I disorder (NCT01244815). Patients were stratified by current episode type (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition – defined mixed/manic), number of lifetime episodes (<3, 3–5, >5), and baseline BMI tertile. Changes from baseline to day 21 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions Scale for use in Bipolar Illness (CGI-BP) were assessed in asenapine subgroups vs placebo.
Results: In patients with mixed episodes, differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were statistically significant for each asenapine dose vs placebo (P<0.001) at day 21; in patients with manic episodes, significant differences vs placebo were seen in all groups (P<0.05) except 2.5 mg BID on the YMRS. In patients with <3 previous mixed/manic episodes, significant differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were observed for all asenapine doses vs placebo (P<0.05). In patients with 3–5 or >5 previous episodes, asenapine 10 mg BID was significantly different than placebo (P<0.05) on both scales; differences vs placebo varied for lower doses. Baseline body weight or BMI did not appear to influence the efficacy of asenapine.
Conclusion: Asenapine was effective in the treatment of pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder. Efficacy did not appear to be influenced by the type of current episode, stage of disease progression, or baseline body weight/BMI.
Keywords: asenapine, child, adolescent, bipolar disorder, atypical antipsychotic, second-generation antipsychotic
This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.Download Article [PDF] View Full Text [HTML][Machine readable]