Comparative Effectiveness Study for Bipolar Disorder
| Tracking Information | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| First Received Date ICMJE | April 6, 2011 | ||||
| Last Updated Date | November 5, 2012 | ||||
| Start Date ICMJE | September 2010 | ||||
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | April 2013 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Current Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
Clinical Global Impression-Efficacy Index (CGI-EI) [ Time Frame: 6 Months ] [ Designated as safety issue: Yes ] The CGI-EI integrates benefits and harms and yields a score that can be compared across interventions. |
||||
| Original Primary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
| Change History | Complete list of historical versions of study NCT01331304 on ClinicalTrials.gov Archive Site | ||||
| Current Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE |
|
||||
| Original Secondary Outcome Measures ICMJE | Same as current | ||||
| Current Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Original Other Outcome Measures ICMJE | Not Provided | ||||
| Descriptive Information | |||||
| Brief Title ICMJE | Comparative Effectiveness Study for Bipolar Disorder | ||||
| Official Title ICMJE | Comparative Effectiveness of a Second Generation Antipsychotic Mood Stabilizer And a Classic Mood Stabilizer for Bipolar Disorder | ||||
| Brief Summary | The purpose of this study is to compare the effectiveness of lithium and quetiapine for the treatment of individuals with bipolar disorder. |
||||
| Detailed Description | Mood stabilizers, medications that prevent future mood episodes, are the foundation for treatment of bipolar disorder. While all published bipolar disorder treatment guidelines recommend that pharmacotherapy should include mood stabilizers for long-term maintenance treatment, no randomized comparative effectiveness studies have examined the real-world advantages and disadvantages of the newer second generation antipsychotic (SGA) mood stabilizers compared to the classic mood stabilizers, such as lithium (Li). No studies have looked at the effectiveness of SGAs compared to mood stabilizers when used in the context of other medications required to manage bipolar patients, since bipolar disorder patients take a median of 3 medications for optimal outcomes. Quetiapine (QTP) is the most extensively studied, broadly efficacious and the most widely prescribed SGA for bipolar disorder. The classic mood stabilizer Li has the largest evidence base for treating bipolar disorder, but has been largely supplanted by the SGAs. Thus, this study compares symptomatic benefits and adverse effect burden between a QTP foundation with adjunctive personalized treatments (QTP+APT) and a mood stabilizer foundation consisting of Li with APT (Li+APT). APT will include any other medication needed with the following exceptions: the QTP+APT cannot receive Li and the Li+APT group cannot receive an antipsychotic. If, however, participants clinically require a switch to, or the addition of any other SGA or mood stabilizer, then those medications can be added as a rescue strategy that will be carefully recorded. Consistent with an effectiveness trial, participants will be able to continue in the study if they require a rescue treatment. The specific plan is a randomized, open, two arm, comparative effectiveness study of QTP+APT vs. Li+APT treatment for 6 months across 10 sites. In summary, this comparative effectiveness study compares fundamentally different acute and continuation treatments for bipolar disorder. The investigators address the key question of whether to use a prototypical mood stabilizing SGA (i.e., QTP) or the classical mood stabilizer Li as the foundational treatment in the context of other necessary adjunctive personalized treatments (APT). |
||||
| Study Type ICMJE | Interventional | ||||
| Study Phase | Phase 4 | ||||
| Study Design ICMJE | Allocation: Randomized Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment Masking: Open Label Primary Purpose: Treatment |
||||
| Condition ICMJE | Bipolar Disorder | ||||
| Intervention ICMJE |
|
||||
| Study Arm (s) |
|
||||
| Publications * | Not Provided | ||||
|
* Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline. |
|||||
| Recruitment Information | |||||
| Recruitment Status ICMJE | Active, not recruiting | ||||
| Estimated Enrollment ICMJE | 480 | ||||
| Estimated Completion Date | September 2013 | ||||
| Estimated Primary Completion Date | April 2013 (final data collection date for primary outcome measure) | ||||
| Eligibility Criteria ICMJE | Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
|
||||
| Gender | Both | ||||
| Ages | 18 Years to 68 Years | ||||
| Accepts Healthy Volunteers | No | ||||
| Contacts ICMJE | Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects | ||||
| Location Countries ICMJE | United States | ||||
| Administrative Information | |||||
| NCT Number ICMJE | NCT01331304 | ||||
| Other Study ID Numbers ICMJE | R01 HS019371-01 | ||||
| Has Data Monitoring Committee | Yes | ||||
| Responsible Party | Andrew A. Nierenberg, MD, Massachusetts General Hospital | ||||
| Study Sponsor ICMJE | Massachusetts General Hospital | ||||
| Collaborators ICMJE | Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) | ||||
| Investigators ICMJE |
|
||||
| Information Provided By | Massachusetts General Hospital | ||||
| Verification Date | November 2012 | ||||
|
ICMJE Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP |
|||||