Lilly Research Laboratories, Indianapolis, Indiana, and McLean Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Belmont, Massachusetts, USA
Department of Psychiatry, University of Texas Health Science Center, San Antonio, Texas, USA
National Mental Health Research Center, Moscow, Russia
Lilly Research Laboratories, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
Eli Lilly Canada, Danforth, Canada
Science Consulting Group, North Tustin, California, USA
Eli Lilly and Company, Area Medical Center, Vienna, Austria
Lilly Research Laboratories, Indianapolis, Indiana, USA
University of Munich, Germany
Correspondence: Dr M. Tohen, Lilly Research Laboratories, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USA. Email: m.tohen{at}lilly.com
Study sponsor: Eli Lilly & Company (employees: M.T., R.B., T.Q., O.O., W.W., F.M. and L.K.). Full declaration in Acknowledgements.
|
|
|---|
Combinations of olanzapine and carbamazepine are often used in clinical practice in the management of mania.
Aims
To assess the efficacy and safety of olanzapine plus carbamazepine in mixed and manic bipolar episodes.
Method
Randomised, double-blind, 6-week trial of olanzapine (10–30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day; n=58) v. placebo plus carbamazepine (n=60) followed by open-label, 20-week olanzapine (10–30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day, n=86), with change in manic symptoms as main outcome measure. Safety and pharmacokinetics were also evaluated.
Results
There were no significant differences (baseline to endpoint) in efficacy
measures between treatment groups, but at 6 weeks triglyceride levels were
significantly higher (P=0.008) and potentially clinically significant
weight gain (
7%) occurred more frequently (24.6% v. 3.4%,
P=0.002) in the combined olanzapine and carbamazepine group.
Carbamazepine reduced olanzapine concentrations but olanzapine had no effect
on carbamazepine concentrations.
Conclusions
The combination of olanzapine and carbamazepine did not have superior efficacy to carbamazepine alone. The increases in weight and triglycerides observed during combination treatment are a matter of concern.
|
|
|---|
30 mg/day) and carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day) for the treatment
of individuals with bipolar disorder during manic or mixed episodes. |
|
|---|
The 6-week double-blind treatment phase evaluated the efficacy and safety of olanzapine (10–30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day) compared with carbamazepine monotherapy (400–1200 mg/day plus a placebo identical to olanzapine) in the treatment of mania associated with bipolar I disorder. The 26-week open-label phase focused on safety measures. During the open-label phase all participants received olanzapine (10–30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day). The study was conducted following the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants gave written informed consent after the procedures had been fully explained.
Participants
Participants were men or women, aged 18–65 years, with a diagnosis of
DSM–IV10
bipolar manic or mixed episode (with or without psychotic features), based on
clinical assessment and confirmed by the Structured Clinical Interview for the
DSM–IV, Axis I Disorders (SCID–I: Clinical
Version).11
Individuals were required to have had a Young Mania Rating Scale
(YMRS)12 total
score of
20 at screening (visit 1, week –1) and at randomisation
(visit 2, week 0).
All participants completing the double-blind phase were eligible to enter the open-label phase. Those who had a history of allergic or adverse reaction, had treatment resistance, or who showed lack of response to either olanzapine or carbamazepine were excluded, as were those who had acute, serious or unstable medical conditions.
Treatments
All patients began the double-blind phase with carbamazepine 400 mg/day,
administered in divided doses. The dose was increased by increments of 200 mg
approximately every 3 days, as tolerated by the individual, reaching a maximum
of 1200 mg/day by week 2. The dose could be decreased at any time if an
adverse event occurred. Participants unable to tolerate the minimum dosage of
carbamazepine (400 mg/day) were asked to withdraw from the study.
In addition to the carbamazepine, participants received either placebo or up to 30 mg/day of olanzapine. Olanzapine therapy began at 10 mg/day and the daily dose was titrated up according to the following titration scheme: 15 mg/day at week 1, 20 mg/day at week 2 and 30 mg/day at week 3. Once reaching 30 mg/day, the olanzapine dosage remained fixed for the duration of the double-blind treatment phase. Individuals unable to reach the fixed dosage of olanzapine at 30 mg/day were asked to withdraw. However, if 30 mg/day was reached but not tolerated, the investigator could decrease the dosage to 20 mg/day. If 20 mg/day was not tolerated, the participant was withdrawn from the study.
Participants randomly assigned to the carbamazepine monotherapy treatment in the double-blind phase began the open-label treatment phase with olanzapine at a dosage of 10 mg/day and carbamazepine at the last dose tolerated during the double-blind phase. Individuals randomly assigned to the olanzapine plus carbamazepine group in the double-blind phase continued taking the last tolerated dose in the open-label phase. Dose adjustments occurred as judged by the investigator, based on perceived therapeutic need/benefit and as tolerated by the individual.
Participants were permitted use of a limited dose of benzodiazepines
(lorazepam
2 mg/day or equivalents), anticholinergics (benzatropine
mesilate or biperiden
6 mg/day), and chronic thyroid supplement therapy
if they were on a stable dose of the medication for at least 60 days before
randomisation.
Investigators assessed adherence to the study drug regimen at each visit, by direct questioning and by counting returned study drug.
Outcome measures
Efficacy: double-blind phase
The severity of manic symptoms was assessed with the
YMRS12 (primary
efficacy variable), the severity of depressive mood symptoms was assessed with
the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale
(MADRS),13 and the
severity of illness was measured with the Clinical Global Impressions –
Bipolar Version Severity of Illness Scale
(CGI–BP).14
Both the MADRS and the CGI–BP were used as secondary efficacy measures.
Additional secondary measures were the rate of response, remission and switch
to depression. A symptomatic responder was defined as any person who
demonstrated an improvement of
50% in the YMRS total score from baseline
to the last measurement value. A symptomatic remitter was defined as any
person who achieved a total score
12 on the YMRS at the last measurement
value. Switch to depression was defined as a baseline MADRS total score
12, followed by either a post-baseline MADRS total score
16 during
the 6 weeks of the double-blind treatment phase or hospitalisation due to
deterioration in clinical symptoms of depression.
Efficacy: open-label phase
The maintenance of treatment effect (primary efficacy measure) was analysed
using the YMRS total score change from baseline (week 6) to endpoint of the
open-label treatment phase. Secondary efficacy measures included relapse into
mania (defined as a person reaching remission of mania, as defined by a YMRS
score
12, by the endpoint of the double-blind phase and subsequently
having a YMRS score
15 at any time and/or becoming hospitalised due to
deterioration in clinical symptoms of mania) and relapse into depression
(defined as a baseline MADRS total score
12, followed by either a
post-baseline MADRS total score
16 or hospitalisation due to
deterioration in clinical symptoms of depression).
Pharmacokinetics
A venous blood sample was collected only during the double-blind phase (at
weeks 4 and 6) to determine the plasma concentrations of olanzapine,
carbamazepine and carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide. The steady-state plasma
concentrations of olanzapine were measured in individuals treated with
olanzapine plus carbamazepine. Participants took their dose of olanzapine and
carbamazepine on the evening before the visit.
Safety
For both study phases, safety was monitored by assessing adverse events,
laboratory values, electrocardiograms (ECGs), vital signs and extrapyramidal
symptoms. The latter were measured with the Simpson–Angus
Scale,15 the Barnes
Akathisia Scale,16
and the Abnormal Involuntary Movement
Scale.17 Clinical
analysis of blood and urine samples was carried out by Covance Central
Laboratory Services, Inc., using Covance reference ranges adjusted for gender
and age. The criteria for clinically significant treatment-emergent changes in
lipids and glucose were based on guidelines from the National Cholesterol
Education Program18
and American Diabetes
Association.19
Long-term metabolic data were obtained by evaluating participants who had
received olanzapine plus carbamazepine for 26 weeks.
Statistical analyses
Data were analysed on an intent-to-treat basis. Approximately 120 adults
were to be randomly assigned to the treatment groups in a 1:1 ratio. Sample
size was estimated to provide more than 80% power to detect a difference of
5.6 in YMRS total reduction with a pooled s.d. of 10.
For the double-blind phase, an analysis-of-covariance (ANCOVA) model was
used to evaluate the difference in continuous efficacy and tolerability
measures (outcome) between the two treatment arms. The ANCOVA model included
terms for investigator site, therapy and baseline measures of the specific
outcome. A mixed-model repeated measures ANCOVA was used to analyse the change
from baseline to each post-baseline visit in the YMRS and MADRS total scores,
and included the terms for baseline measures of the YMRS/MADRS total score,
visit, investigator site, therapy and therapy by visit in the model. The
last-observation-carried-forward (LOCF) method was used to analyse mean
changes from baseline to endpoint. The
Cochran–Mantel–Haenszel2
2-test adjusted for investigator site was used to test the
proportion differences in the two treatment arms.
A post hoc subgroup analysis (ANCOVA) of the change from baseline to endpoint (LOCF) for the YMRS total score was performed comparing the responders and non-responders of the double-blind phase. In addition, the long-term metabolic analyses were completed post hoc.
A potentially clinically significant change was defined as a value that did not meet the criteria at baseline but met the criteria any time after baseline. For mean change analyses in efficacy and safety measures, as well as potentially clinically significant categorical changes in vital-sign measurements and ECG findings, baseline was defined as the last observation before the start of the study period (for the double-blind phase, screening and randomisation, i.e. visits 1 and 2, weeks –1 and 0; for the open-label phase, the end of double-blind phase, i.e. LOCF visit 7, week 6). For treatment-emergent categorical analyses with regard to treatment-emergent adverse events, laboratory abnormalities and scale-based abnormalities in extrapyramidal symptoms and for potentially clinically significant changes in laboratory values, baseline was visits 1 and 2 for the double-blind phase and for the open-label phase it was the LOCF endpoint of the double-blind phase. Categorical outcomes that first occurred within the study period, as well as adverse events that worsened from baseline, were considered treatment emergent.
Analyses were tested using a two-sided alpha level of 0.05. Throughout, demographic and safety data are described with mean (s.d.), and efficacy data are described with least squares means.
An analysis-of-variance (ANOVA) statistical evaluation was used to compare the carbamazepine and carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide steady-state plasma concentrations between treatments.
All statistical analyses were conducted using SAS version 8.2 (SAS Institute, Cary, North Carolina, USA) on a mainframe computer.
|
|
|---|
![]() View larger version (39K): [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide] |
Fig. 1 Diagram showing progress of the participants through the trial. a. One
participant withdrew from the double-blind phase owing to an adverse event
(elevated liver enzyme) but was dispensed the open-label treatment, so the
individual was considered to have entered the open-label phase. The
participant decided to withdraw from the open-label phase. Hence the number of
individuals completing the double-blind phase does not directly correspond
with the number of people entering the open-label phase.
|
Efficacy
Double-blind phase
The change from baseline to endpoint (LOCF) in the YMRS total score was not
significantly different between the olanzapine plus carbamazepine and the
carbamazepine monotherapy treatment groups
(Table 1). Likewise, the
changes in YMRS total score from baseline to each weekly assessment (LOCF)
were not statistically significantly different between treatment groups
(Table 1). Clinical response
was reported in 63.8% (37/58) of the olanzapine plus carbamazepine-treated
participants and 66.1% (39/59) of the carbamazepine monotherapy-treated
participants, a statistically nonsignificant difference. Similarly, the
treatment groups did not significantly differ in the proportion of individuals
who reached remission at endpoint (LOCF: olanzapine plus carbamazepine 55.2%
(32/58); carbamazepine monotherapy 59.3% (35/59)) or switched to depression
(olanzapine plus carbamazepine 10.2% (5/49); carbamazepine monotherapy 14.0%
(7/50)). In addition, the groups did not significantly differ in
baseline-to-endpoint changes in CGI–BP or MADRS total scores
(Table 1).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
Table 1 Efficacy outcomes during the 6-week double-blind phase (last observation
carried
forward)a
|
The mean dosage of carbamazepine was 617.52 mg/day for the olanzapine plus carbamazepine group and 717.33 mg/day for the monotherapy group (P=0.015, d.f.=1,104, F=6.14). Adjusting for mean carbamazepine dose, the treatment groups did not significantly differ in mean changes in their YMRS total score from baseline to endpoint (LOCF; olanzapine plus carbamazepine – 15.97; carbamazepine monotherapy –14.99; P=0.513, d.f.=1,101, F=0.43).
Open-label phase
Among the individuals with both baseline and post-baseline visits
(n=85), there was a statistically significant mean decrease from
baseline (week 6) to endpoint (LOCF) for YMRS total score (baseline mean 9.56,
s.d.=8.36; change –5.94, s.d.=8.09, P<0.001, d.f.=84,
t=–6.77). In total, 66 responders and 19 non-responders entered
the open-label phase. During this phase, no statistically significant
difference between responders and non-responders (P=0.298, d.f.=1,82,
F=1.10) was observed for the change from baseline to endpoint (LOCF)
in the YMRS total score. However, statistically significant within-group
improvements were noted from baseline for both responders and non-responders
(P<0.001 for each group, d.f.=82, t=–6.01 for
responders, t=–3.88 for non-responders). Also during the
open-label phase, 9.1% (7/77) of participants relapsed into depression and
3.4% (2/59) relapsed into mania.
Pharmacokinetics (double-blind phase only)
The majority of individuals (69.0%) were titrated to a mean daily dose of
30 mg olanzapine. Participants (n=43 providing n=81
concentration measurements) who received an olanzapine dose of 20 mg
(n=5) or 30 mg (n=76) had a median olanzapine plasma
concentration of 32.8 ng/ml (minimum 2.6 ng/ml, maximum 85.7 ng/ml; see also
Table 2).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
Table 2 Olanzapine plasma concentration summary after multiple doses of olanzapine
administered with carbamazepine (6-week double-blind phase)
|
Olanzapine did not affect the pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine. The carbamazepine and carbamazepine-10,11-epoxide steady-state concentrations were not significantly different between the treatments. The distribution (n, 10th to 90th percentile) of carbamazepine concentrations for carbamazepine plus olanzapine treatment (n=83; 4.3–9.5 µg/ml) v. carbamazepine monotherapy (n=88; 3.8–9.6 µg/ml) showed the lack of difference (Fig. 2). Furthermore, for both treatments most (89%) carbamazepine plasma concentrations were within the therapeutic concentration window of 4–12 µg/ml.22 An evaluation of the change from baseline for YMRS total score v. plasma concentrations of olanzapine or carbamazepine did not reveal a meaningful relationship.
![]() View larger version (20K): [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide] |
Fig. 2 Carbamazepine plasma concentration when administered with placebo or
olanzapine. The middle line in each box represents the median; the top and
bottom margins of each box represent the 75th and 25th percentiles. The
whiskers extend to the 90th and the 10th percentiles; data points beyond the
whiskers represent individual data in the tails of the distribution.
n, total number of observations; all quantifiable concentrations were
included.
|
Although the individuals with depression and adenovirus infection withdrew from the study, the person with nephrolithiasis continued with the study. None of the serious events were considered by the investigator to be possibly related to study drugs. No deaths were reported.
Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in
5% of the population
are listed in Table 3. The only
statistically significant between-group differences in the incidence of
treatment-emergent adverse events were for alanine aminotransferase and
constipation (alanine aminotransferase P=0.05, d.f.=1,
2=3.85 more often in individuals treated with combination
therapy; constipation P=0.005, d.f.=1,
2=7.81 more
often in individuals treated with monotherapy:
Table 3).
|
View this table: [in a new window] |
Table 3 Summary of treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in 5% of
participants in either treatment group during the 6-week double-blind
phase
|
Clinical laboratory evaluation
Statistically significant differences in mean changes at endpoint were
observed between treatment groups for several laboratory measures (see online
Table DS2). Both treatment groups had a mean increase from baseline to
endpoint in total cholesterol (olanzapine plus carbamazepine 0.81 mmol/l,
s.d.=0.88; carbamazepine 0.62 mmol/l, s.d.=1.02), but this difference was not
statistically significant (P=0.226, d.f.=1,99, F=1.49).
The incidences of treatment-emergent clinically significant changes in
fasting glucose levels (normal to high) were not statistically significantly
different between the groups (olanzapine plus carbamazepine 7.7% (4/52);
carbamazepine monotherapy 2.3% (1/44); P=0.352, d.f.=1,
2=0.87; see online Table DS3). The groups did significantly
differ in the incidence of treatment-emergent changes from normal to high
triglycerides (olanzapine plus carbamazepine 20.6% (7/34); carbamazepine
monotherapy 3.2% (1/31); P=0.049, d.f.=1,
2=3.86).
Also, there was a three times greater, but not a statistically significant,
difference (P=0.117, d.f.=1,
2=2.46) in the incidence
of treatment-emergent changes from normal to high total cholesterol
(olanzapine plus carbamazepine 25.0% (6/24); carbamazepine monotherapy 8.0%
(2/25)).
Vital signs, ECGs, extrapyramidal symptoms and weight
Although there were no statistically significant differences between groups
on several measures of vital signs (namely orthostatic pulse, standing pulse
and temperature; see online Table DS2), the incidences of potentially
clinically significant changes in vital signs were all <8%. Carbamazepine
monotherapy-treated participants had a statistically significantly greater
mean decrease in heart rate than olanzapine plus carbamazepine-treated
participants (–5.51 beats per minute, s.d.=13.87 v. 0.87,
s.d.=12.81 respectively; P=0.021, d.f.=1,95, F=5.54). Also,
the groups statistically significantly differed in the mean changes in
uncorrected QT intervals, with carbamazepine monotherapy-treated participants
experiencing an increase (8.11 ms, s.d.=25.11) and olanzapine plus
carbamazepine-treated participants having a decrease (–7.79 ms,
s.d.=27.07; P=0.023, d.f.=1, 96, F=5.37). However, none of
these changes were deemed clinically significant.
Extrapyramidal symptom scores during the double-blind phase were not statistically significantly different between the groups on any scale measurement.
From baseline to endpoint, olanzapine plus carbamazepine-treated
individuals had a statistically significantly greater mean weight gain than
carbamazepine-treated individuals (see online Table DS2). In addition,
potentially clinically significant weight gain (
7% from baseline) at any
time was significantly more common in the olanzapine plus carbamazepine
treatment group (olanzapine plus carbamazepine 24.6% (14/57); carbamazepine
3.4% (2/59); P=0.002, d.f.=1,
2=9.57).
Safety: open-label phase
Adverse events
A total of 11.6% (10/86) of the olanzapine plus carbamazepine-treated
individuals withdrew from the open-label study because of adverse events,
specifically: increased alanine aminotransferase, depression,
hypersensitivity, major depression, oligomenorrhoea, renal colic, sedation and
suicide attempt. Depression was the only adverse event that resulted in the
withdrawal of more than one person (n=3). A total of 4 people
experienced serious adverse events (n=1 nephrolithiasis and renal
colic; n=1 adenovirus infection; n=1 anxiety, insomnia and
suicide attempt; n=1 hypersensitivity reaction). Only the
hypersensitivity reaction was considered possibly related to the study drugs.
No deaths were reported.
Weight gain was the only treatment-emergent adverse event that occurred in
5% of participants and was reported by 5.8% (5/86) of the open-label
sample. At least one treatment-emergent adverse event was reported in 38.4%
(33/86) of the patients during the 20-week open-label period.
Clinical laboratory evaluation
In the open-label phase, statistically significant differences in mean
changes at endpoint were observed for several laboratory measures (see online
Table DS2). There was a statistically significant decline in platelet count at
the end of the open-label phase (P=0.004, d.f.=84,
t=–2.99). Mean levels of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate
aminotransferase did not significantly change from baseline; however, the
measures did decrease by endpoint (alanine aminotransferase –2.75 U/l,
s.d.=20.20; aspartate aminotransferase –1.27 U/l, s.d.=10.48). High
levels of fasting glucose were reported by 4.2% (3/71) of the sample and high
levels of gamma-glutamyl transferase were reported by 2.5% (2/80) of the
sample.
Similar to the double-blind phase, at the end of the open-label phase, 9.9% (7/71) of participants had treatment-emergent clinically significant changes in fasting glucose levels (from normal to high; see online Table DS3). Most cholesterol and triglycerides categories, except for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, showed increases from normal to borderline, normal to high, or borderline to high (see online Table DS3).
Vital signs, ECGs, extrapyramidal symptoms and weight
No statistically significant changes in vital signs, ECG, or extrapyramidal
symptoms were observed during the open-label phase.
Individuals had a statistically and clinically significant mean weight
increase at study end (see online Table DS2). Approximately 15.0% (13/85) of
participants had a potentially clinically significant weight gain (
7%
from baseline) at any time during the open-label phase.
Figure 3 presents the weight
change by randomisation groups during the entire course of the study. The
carbamazepine monotherapy-treated individuals did not demonstrate weight
increase during the double-blind phase (mean change from randomisation to week
6: 0.60 kg, s.d.=2.56); however, their weight increased during the open-label
phase when they were exposed to olanzapine plus carbamazepine treatment (mean
change from randomisation to study end: 3.35 kg, s.d.=4.26 – an
additional mean gain of 2.75 kg). Participants randomly assigned to the
olanzapine plus carbamazepine group had a continuous weight gain (mean change
from randomisation to study end: 5.53 kg, s.d.=4.90).
![]() View larger version (10K): [in a new window] [as a PowerPoint slide] |
Fig. 3 Visit-wise mean weight changes from randomisation for participants who
entered the open-label phase. All participants were exposed to olanzapine plus
carbamazepine in the open-label phase. n, total number of
observations at each weekly visit. a. Olanzapine plus carbamazepine
v. carbamazepine monotherapy at the end of the 6-week double-blind
phase, P<0.001 (d.f.=1,101, F=24.41). b. Change from
randomisation to endpoint (week 26), P<0.001 (d.f.=56,
t=5.51). c. Change from baseline (week 6) to endpoint (week 26),
P<0.001 (d.f.=41, t=4.60).
|
Forty-three of the 58 individuals who were randomly assigned to olanzapine plus carbamazepine treatment during the double-blind phase entered the open-label phase. Their metabolic laboratory results are shown in the online Tables DS2 and DS3. In addition we observed that of the 52 participants with low or normal cholesterol at baseline, 23 (44.2%) had an increase in cholesterol higher than the upper limit of the Covance reference range during the 26-week treatment period. Also, participants with normal or low measures at baseline reached laboratory values higher than the upper limit of the Covance reference range for fasting glucose (19.6% (9/46)), high-density lipoprotein (19.6% (11/56)), low-density lipoprotein (34.6% (18/52)) and triglycerides (46.0% (23/50)). Long-term treatment with olanzapine plus carbamazepine resulted in a 3.70 kg mean weight gain from randomisation to endpoint.
|
|
|---|
Study safety findings
Weight gain observed during treatment with both carbamazepine and
olanzapine has been previously reported in people with bipolar
disorder.1–3,23–25
In the present study, individuals in both treatment groups (olanzapine plus
carbamazepine and carbamazepine monotherapy) had a mean increase in weight
from randomisation. Individuals treated with olanzapine plus carbamazepine,
however, had a statistically significantly greater weight gain than those
treated with carbamazepine monotherapy (see
Fig. 2 and online Table DS2).
In addition, a potentially clinically significant weight gain (
7% from
baseline) during the 6-week double-blind phase occurred in 24.6% (14/57) of
the olanzapine plus carbamazepine–treated participants and 3.4% (2/59)
of the carbamazepine-treated participants, and during the 20-week open-label
phase in 15.3% (13/85) of the olanzapine plus carbamazepine-treated
participants. Those treated with olanzapine plus carbamazepine long term (26
weeks) had a 3.70 kg mean weight gain from randomisation to endpoint, which is
comparable with a 3.41 kg weight gain at 30 weeks in a previously published
double-blind study of
olanzapine.24
Hyperlipidemia has been reported during olanzapine and carbamazepine monotherapies. Several clinical trial publications report an increase in total cholesterol and triglycerides during treatment with olanzapine.23,24,26 Likewise, several clinical trials report an increase in total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, cholesterol and triglycerides with carbamazepine use.3,4,25,27 From baseline to endpoint of the double-blind phase of the present study, participants treated with olanzapine plus carbamazepine had statistically significantly higher increases in mean triglyceride levels than individuals treated with carbamazepine alone (P<0.008; see online Table DS2). A limitation of the study is that the carbamazepine monotherapy arm was not continued into the open-label phase and there was no olanzapine monotherapy arm. Thus, it would be speculative to draw conclusions on whether this increase was driven by olanzapine or by the synergism of the combination. In addition, individuals in both the olanzapine plus carbamazepine and carbamazepine monotherapy groups showed a mean increase in total cholesterol, which was not statistically significantly different between the groups. Long term (26 weeks), individuals treated with olanzapine plus carbamazepine had a 0.84 mmol/l (s.d.=1.11) mean increase in cholesterol from randomisation to endpoint, which is higher than the 0.24 mmol/l (s.d.=1.15) mean change during 47 weeks in individuals treated with olanzapine monotherapy.24 Further, 44.2% of the individuals receiving long-term treatment had an increase in cholesterol beyond the upper limit of the Covance reference range compared with a previous report of 14.0% of individuals treated with olanzapine monotherapy for 47 weeks24 (for the purposes of this comparison, the percentage reported in this article – 12.2% – was converted to 14.0% using the Covance reference range). Thus, there is a suggestion of an additive effect on cholesterol, which is attributed to the combination.
Pharmacokinetic considerations
Any time two drugs are taken concomitantly, there is the potential for
drug–drug interactions. Concomitant administration of carbamazepine has
been shown to increase the clearance of olanzapine by 40–50%, most
likely owing to the induction of cytochrome P450 1A2 and glucuronidation
pathways.9 In a
naturalistic clinical setting, substantially lower concentrations of
olanzapine were consistently observed during treatment with olanzapine plus
carbamazepine.21
Likewise, in the present study, carbamazepine induced the metabolism of
olanzapine and lowered the exposure of olanzapine by approximately 50%. In
anticipation of this clinically meaningful decrease in olanzapine
concentration, the present study used a fixed olanzapine dosage of 30 mg/day,
even though any dosage greater than 20 mg/day is outside the currently
recommended dose range for olanzapine (5–20
mg/day).28 Indeed,
the higher dose was needed to compensate for the cytochrome P450 enzyme
induction attributed to carbamazepine – the systemic olanzapine exposure
was similar to that achieved after administering 15 mg/day to an individual
not taking an enzyme inducer.
It is conceivable that the known metabolic induction of carbamazepine that affects olanzapine pharmacokinetics may have driven olanzapine concentrations to potentially subtherapeutic levels, even after the olanzapine dose was increased to 30 mg/day. This induction could explain the failure of the combination therapy to demonstrate superior efficacy over carbamazepine monotherapy. However, this theory appears unlikely given that the concentrations of olanzapine were within a range that is typically associated with therapeutic effectiveness.
The wide carbamazepine dosage range of 400–1200 mg/day used in this study is consistent with the dosage recommendations for carbamazepine treatment22 and is needed to individualise the dosage that will achieve therapeutic concentrations of carbamazepine. None the less, the steady-state concentrations of carbamazepine and its metabolite were not affected by olanzapine. The carbamazepine plasma concentrations were maintained in the therapeutic range when administered with placebo or olanzapine. These results suggest that olanzapine does not affect the pharmacokinetics of carbamazepine.
Given the complexity of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationships for neuropsychiatry drugs and limited number of measurements of the concentrations of olanzapine and carbamazepine, an analysis of the data from this study did not reveal a predictive, clinically meaningful or simple relationship between the concentrations of these drugs and the clinical response.
Summary
Other studies have been published with negative outcomes on the primary
efficacy variable. For example, Bowden et
al29 reported
that divalproex and lithium were not significantly different from placebo in
preventing mania or depression in a 1-year, randomised double-blind study. In
addition, Yatham et
al30 reported
that quetiapine plus lithium/divalproex failed to differentiate from placebo
plus lithium/divalproex treatment on the primary efficacy variable in a
randomised double-blind study. These negative findings are not unique. One out
of four placebo-controlled trials of atypical antipsychotics in acute mania
and 40% of unpublished trials in mania fail to differentiate statistically
between placebo and treatment effects on the primary outcome
variable.31 The
greater response to placebo has been attributed to low symptomatic severity,
concomitant or rescue medications, high number of active treatment groups,
mixed episode and absence of psychotic
symptoms.31
Therefore, reasons other than pharmacokinetics may explain the negative
outcome in this study. Further, a recent review found that add-on designs are
more likely to have negative results (further details available from the
author on request). For example, another add-on trial that used carbamazepine
was also
negative.32
To summarise, olanzapine (up to 30 mg/day) plus carbamazepine (400–1200 mg/day) did not have superior efficacy to carbamazepine monotherapy (400–1200 mg/day) in treating bipolar mania. The types of adverse events reported for olanzapine plus carbamazepine treatment were consistent with the known olanzapine and carbamazepine safety profiles. The combination was associated with a potential additive increase in weight, total cholesterol and triglycerides. Weight, total cholesterol and triglycerides should be monitored when combining carbamazepine with olanzapine treatment.
|
|
|---|
|
|
|---|
Related articles in BJP:
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
J. Cookson Atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder: the treatment of mania Adv. Psychiatr. Treat., September 1, 2008; 14(5): 330 - 338. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||