Effect of Citalopram on Agitation in Alzheimer Disease The CitAD Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance  Agitation is common, persistent, and associated with adverse consequences for patients with Alzheimer disease. Pharmacological treatment options, including antipsychotics are not satisfactory.

Objective  The primary objective was to evaluate the efficacy of citalopram for agitation in patients with Alzheimer disease. Key secondary objectives examined effects of citalopram on function, caregiver distress, safety, cognitive safety, and tolerability.

Design, Setting, and Participants  The Citalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer Disease Study (CitAD) was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel group trial that enrolled 186 patients with probable Alzheimer disease and clinically significant agitation from 8 academic centers in the United States and Canada from August 2009 to January 2013.

Interventions  Participants (n = 186) were randomized to receive a psychosocial intervention plus either citalopram (n = 94) or placebo (n = 92) for 9 weeks. Dosage began at 10 mg per day with planned titration to 30 mg per day over 3 weeks based on response and tolerability.

Main Outcomes and Measures  Primary outcome measures were based on scores from the 18-point Neurobehavioral Rating Scale agitation subscale (NBRS-A) and the modified Alzheimer Disease Cooperative Study-Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS-CGIC). Other outcomes were based on scores from the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) and the Neuropsychiatric Inventory (NPI), ability to complete activities of daily living (ADLs), caregiver distress, cognitive safety (based on scores from the 30-point Mini Mental State Examination [MMSE]), and adverse events.

Results  Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement compared with those who received placebo on both primary outcome measures. The NBRS-A estimated treatment difference at week 9 (citalopram minus placebo) was −0.93 (95% CI, −1.80 to −0.06), P = .04. Results from the mADCS-CGIC showed 40% of citalopram participants having moderate or marked improvement from baseline compared with 26% of placebo recipients, with estimated treatment effect (odds ratio [OR] of being at or better than a given CGIC category) of 2.13 (95% CI, 1.23-3.69), P = .01. Participants who received citalopram showed significant improvement on the CMAI, total NPI, and caregiver distress scores but not on the NPI agitation subscale, ADLs, or in less use of rescue lorazepam. Worsening of cognition (−1.05 points; 95% CI, −1.97 to −0.13; P = .03) and QT interval prolongation (18.1 ms; 95% CI, 6.1-30.1; P = .01) were seen in the citalopram group.

Conclusions and Relevance  Among patients with probable Alzheimer disease and agitation who were receiving psychosocial intervention, the addition of citalopram compared with placebo significantly reduced agitation and caregiver distress; however, cognitive and cardiac adverse effects of citalopram may limit its practical application at the dosage of 30 mg per day.

Refence: JAMA. 2014;311(7):682-691. doi:10.1001/jama.2014.93.

Clinical trial of an inhibitor of RAGE-Aβ interactions in Alzheimer disease

Objective: To examine safety, tolerability, and efficacy of PF-04494700, an inhibitor of the receptor for advanced glycation end products (RAGE), in mild to moderate Alzheimer disease (AD).

Methods: Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at 40 academic centers (United States). Subjects with AD and Mini-Mental State Examination score 14–26 were randomized to PF-04494700 60 mg/day × 6 days, then 20 mg daily (high dose); 15 mg/day × 6 days, then 5 mg daily (low dose); or placebo, for 18 months. Clinical and laboratory measures were used to evaluate safety and tolerability. The primary efficacy measure was the Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale–cognitive (ADAS-cog). Secondary measures assessed clinical stage, function, behavior, MRI, and CSF biomarkers.

Results: A total of 399 subjects were randomized. In a prespecified interim analysis, when 50% of subjects had completed the 6-month visit, the high dose was associated with confusion, falls, and greater ADAS-cog decline and was discontinued. A second prespecified analysis compared low-dose and placebo groups for futility and safety approximately 12 months after all subjects were randomized. This analysis met criteria for futility, and treatment was discontinued. There were no safety concerns in the low-dose group. Analyses including post-futility data showed decreased decline on the ADAS-cog in the low-dose group at month 18. Other clinical and biomarker measures showed no differences between low-dose treatment and placebo.

Conclusions: PF-04494700 at 20 mg/d was associated with increased adverse events and cognitive decline. At 5 mg/d, PF-04494700 had a good safety profile. A potential benefit for this low dose on the ADAS-cog is not conclusive, because of high dropout and discontinuation rates subsequent to the interim analyses.

Classification of evidence: This study provides Class I evidence that in patients with AD high-dose PF-04494700 increased cognitive decline at 6 months and Class IV evidence that low-dose PF-04494700 slowed cognitive decline at 18 months.

Full text