Lexapro and Pramipexole and to Treat Major Depression
This study has been completed.
Sponsor:
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
Carlos Zarate, M.D., National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC)
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT00086307
First received: June 29, 2004
Last updated: January 11, 2013
Last verified: January 2013
- Full Text View
- Tabular View
- Study Results
- Disclaimer
- How to Read a Study Record
Results First Received: June 7, 2012
| Study Type: | Interventional |
|---|---|
| Study Design: | Allocation: Randomized; Endpoint Classification: Efficacy Study; Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment; Masking: Double Blind (Subject, Caregiver, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor); Primary Purpose: Treatment |
| Condition: |
Major Depression |
| Interventions: |
Drug: Pramipexole Drug: Escitalopram |
Participant Flow
Recruitment Details
| Key information relevant to the recruitment process for the overall study, such as dates of the recruitment period and locations |
|---|
| No text entered. |
Pre-Assignment Details
| Significant events and approaches for the overall study following participant enrollment, but prior to group assignment |
|---|
| No text entered. |
Reporting Groups
| Description | |
|---|---|
| Pramipexole | Patients receive pramipexole and placebo. |
| Escitalopram | Patients receive escitalopram and placebo. |
| Escitalopram and Pramipexole | Patients receive escitalopram and pramipexole. |
Participant Flow: Overall Study
| Pramipexole | Escitalopram | Escitalopram and Pramipexole | |
|---|---|---|---|
| STARTED | 13 | 13 | 13 |
| COMPLETED | 11 | 12 | 5 |
| NOT COMPLETED | 2 | 1 | 8 |
| Lack of Efficacy | 1 | 1 | 2 |
| Shortness of breath and muscle spasms | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Nausea and headaches | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Constipation and sleepiness | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Suicidal ideation | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Fatigue and difficulty falling asleep | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Withdrawal by Subject | 0 | 0 | 2 |
Baseline Characteristics
Reporting Groups
| Description | |
|---|---|
| Pramipexole | Patients receive pramipexole and placebo. |
| Escitalopram | Patients receive escitalopram and placebo. |
| Escitalopram and Pramipexole | Patients receive escitalopram and pramipexole. |
| Total | Total of all reporting groups |
Baseline Measures
| Pramipexole | Escitalopram | Escitalopram and Pramipexole | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants
[units: participants] |
13 | 13 | 13 | 39 |
|
Age
[units: participants] |
||||
| <=18 years | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Between 18 and 65 years | 13 | 13 | 13 | 39 |
| >=65 years | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
|
Age
[units: years] Mean ± Standard Deviation |
44.8 ± 10.1 | 45.6 ± 13.6 | 45.3 ± 12.7 | 45.3 ± 11.9 |
|
Gender
[units: participants] |
||||
| Female | 7 | 9 | 11 | 27 |
| Male | 6 | 4 | 2 | 12 |
|
Region of Enrollment
[units: participants] |
||||
| United States | 13 | 13 | 13 | 39 |
Outcome Measures
| 1. Primary: | Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) [ Time Frame: Weekly ] |
Hide Outcome Measure 1| Measure Type | Primary |
|---|---|
| Measure Title | Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) |
| Measure Description | The Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) is a 10 item scale for assessing the severity of depression. Items are rated on a scale of 0 to 6, so the maximum score is 60 and the minimum is 0, where 60 is the most severe depression. Scores of 18 or greater are generally considered to indicate a moderate level of depression. |
| Time Frame | Weekly |
| Safety Issue | No |
Population Description
| Explanation of how the number of participants for analysis was determined. Includes whether analysis was per protocol, intention to treat, or another method. Also provides relevant details such as imputation technique, as appropriate. |
|---|
| All patients with at least one post-baseline measurement were included in the analysis. |
Reporting Groups
| Description | |
|---|---|
| Pramipexole | Patients receive pramipexole and placebo. |
| Escitalopram | Patients receive escitalopram and placebo. |
| Escitalopram and Pramipexole | Patients receive escitalopram and pramipexole. |
Measured Values
| Pramipexole | Escitalopram | Escitalopram and Pramipexole | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
Number of Participants Analyzed
[units: participants] |
13 | 13 | 13 |
|
Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
[units: Score on a scale] Least Squares Mean ± Standard Error |
22.629 ± 1.508 | 26.102 ± 1.507 | 29.455 ± 1.732 |
Statistical Analysis 1 for Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
| Groups [1] | All groups |
|---|---|
| Method [2] | Mixed Models Analysis |
| P Value [3] | .018 |
| Mean Difference (Net) [4] | 6.826 |
| Standard Error of the mean | ± 2.296 |
| 95% Confidence Interval | ( 1.111 to 12.541 ) |
| [1] | Additional details about the analysis, such as null hypothesis and power calculation: |
|---|---|
| A linear mixed model with restricted maximum likelihood estimation and a first order autoregressive covariance structure was used to examine depressive symptoms over time. Fixed factors for drug, time, and a time by drug interaction were included in the model along with the intercept. No random factors were included because the subject factor did not contribute significantly to the model. Baseline symptoms were used as a covariate. | |
| [2] | Other relevant information, such as adjustments or degrees of freedom: |
| No text entered. | |
| [3] | Additional information, such as whether or not the p-value is adjusted for multiple comparisons and the a priori threshold for statistical significance: |
| This is the omnibus effect of drug. | |
| [4] | Other relevant estimation information: |
| No text entered. |
Statistical Analysis 2 for Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
| Groups [1] | Pramipexole vs. Escitalopram and Pramipexole |
|---|---|
| Method [2] | Post hoc simple effects test |
| P Value [3] | .014 |
| Mean Difference (Net) [4] | 6.826 |
| Standard Error of the mean | ± 2.296 |
| 95% Confidence Interval | ( 1.111 to 12.541 ) |
| [1] | Additional details about the analysis, such as null hypothesis and power calculation: |
|---|---|
| Post-hoc simple effects tests with Bonferroni correction were used to compare the pramipexole group to the pramipexole and escitalopram combination group. | |
| [2] | Other relevant information, such as adjustments or degrees of freedom: |
| No text entered. | |
| [3] | Additional information, such as whether or not the p-value is adjusted for multiple comparisons and the a priori threshold for statistical significance: |
| The significance level was adjusted using a Bonferroni correction. | |
| [4] | Other relevant estimation information: |
| The pramipexole group had a lower MADRS score than the pramipexole and escitalopram group. |
Statistical Analysis 3 for Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
| Groups [1] | Escitalopram vs. Escitalopram and Pramipexole |
|---|---|
| Method [2] | Post hoc simple effects test |
| P Value [3] | .454 |
| Mean Difference (Net) [4] | 3.353 |
| Standard Error of the mean | ± 2.296 |
| 95% Confidence Interval | ( -2.360 to 9.066 ) |
| [1] | Additional details about the analysis, such as null hypothesis and power calculation: |
|---|---|
| Post-hoc simple effects tests with Bonferroni correction were used to compare the escitalopram group to the pramipexole and escitalopram combination group. | |
| [2] | Other relevant information, such as adjustments or degrees of freedom: |
| No text entered. | |
| [3] | Additional information, such as whether or not the p-value is adjusted for multiple comparisons and the a priori threshold for statistical significance: |
| The significance level was adjusted using a Bonferroni correction. | |
| [4] | Other relevant estimation information: |
| The escitalopram group had a lower MADRS score than the pramipexole and escitalopram group. |
Statistical Analysis 4 for Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
| Groups [1] | Pramipexole vs. Escitalopram |
|---|---|
| Method [2] | Post hoc simple effects test |
| P Value [3] | .349 |
| Mean Difference (Net) [4] | 3.473 |
| Standard Error of the mean | ± 2.162 |
| 95% Confidence Interval | ( -1.942 to 8.888 ) |
| [1] | Additional details about the analysis, such as null hypothesis and power calculation: |
|---|---|
| Post-hoc simple effects tests with Bonferroni correction were used to compare the pramipexole group to the escitalopram group. | |
| [2] | Other relevant information, such as adjustments or degrees of freedom: |
| No text entered. | |
| [3] | Additional information, such as whether or not the p-value is adjusted for multiple comparisons and the a priori threshold for statistical significance: |
| The significance level was adjusted using a Bonferroni correction. | |
| [4] | Other relevant estimation information: |
| The pramipexole group had a lower MADRS score than the escitalopram group. |
More Information
Certain Agreements:
Limitations and Caveats
Results Point of Contact:
Publications:
| Principal Investigators are NOT employed by the organization sponsoring the study. |
| There is NOT an agreement between Principal Investigators and the Sponsor (or its agents) that restricts the PI's rights to discuss or publish trial results after the trial is completed. |
Limitations and Caveats
| Limitations of the study, such as early termination leading to small numbers of participants analyzed and technical problems with measurement leading to unreliable or uninterpretable data |
|---|
| No text entered. |
Results Point of Contact:
Name/Title: Dr. Carlos A. Zarate
Organization: NIMH
phone: 301-451-0861
e-mail: zaratec@mail.nih.gov
Organization: NIMH
phone: 301-451-0861
e-mail: zaratec@mail.nih.gov
Publications:
| Responsible Party: | Carlos Zarate, M.D., National Institutes of Health Clinical Center (CC) |
| ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: | NCT00086307 History of Changes |
| Other Study ID Numbers: | 040227, 04-M-0227 |
| Study First Received: | June 29, 2004 |
| Results First Received: | June 7, 2012 |
| Last Updated: | January 11, 2013 |
| Health Authority: | United States: Federal Government |