The Effect of a Six Week Intensified Pharmacological Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder Compared to Treatment as Usual in Subjects Who Had a First-time Treatment Failure on Their First-line Treatment. (INTENSIFY MDD)
A Randomised, Controlled Trial to Investigate the Effect of a Sixweek Intensified Pharmacological Treatment for Major Depressive Disorder Compared to Treatment as Usual in Subjects Who Had a First-time Treatment Failure on Their First-line Treatment.
Study Overview
Status
Detailed Description
Rationale Over 28 million people suffer from current depressive disorder in the European Union. Major depressive disorder (MDD) is one of the most common psychiatric illnesses. The symptoms cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, and other important areas of functioning. To treat MDD, there are several antidepressants available and prescribing medication is a process of trial-and-error. Guidelines do not explicitly advise on the order in which antidepressant medication should be prescribed. The choice of antidepressant should be tailored to the patient, while involving the patient in the decision-making process. In general, the choice for the first- and second-line treatment will be a second-generation antidepressant. Recently, esketamine nasal spray (intranasal (IN) administration) was approved for patients with treatment-resistant MDD (TRD). A patient is diagnosed with TRD when having used two antidepressants in sufficient duration and adequate dose without sufficient effect. TRD is associated with a negative impact on quality of life, higher risk for hospitalisations and suicide, comorbidities, poorer social and occupational functioning and a high carer burden. The efficacy of intranasal use of esketamine has been demonstrated in MDD subjects with treatment-resistant symptoms but also in subjects with non-treatment resistant depression, and is approved by the FDA and EMA as a third-line treatment. Besides the registered esketamine nasal spray, which is not available in all countries to all patients because of the high costs, off-label utilization of (es)ketamine infusions (IV) is growing extensively over time to treat TRD. Research conducted so far indicates an unequivocal initial substantial response to (es)ketamine IV in MDD populations, regardless of whether or not patients suffer from treatment resistant MDD. However, until now, there has not been a study investigating this in a sufficiently large population. This may be a unique opportunity to potentially prevent patients progressing into a treatment resistant illness stage. The potential implications of the results of the current study are the prevention of unnecessary trials of ineffective treatments, reducing subject burden substantially, as well as a reduction of healthcare and societal costs.
Objective The primary objective is to compare the treatment response (baseline; visit 2 vs. end of treatment; visit 4), expressed as symptom severity at six weeks and changes in symptom severity from baseline, as measured through the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) under an early-intensified pharmacological treatment to that under treatment as usual, in subjects who had a first-time treatment failure of first-line treatment during the current episode of MDD.
Main trial endpoints Change in symptom severity total score from baseline (visit 2) to end of treatment (visit 4). This is measured using MADRS.
Secondary trial endpoints
- To compare changes in severity and improvement in global functioning assessed by the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) between the two treatment arms.
- To compare changes in the levels of depression and anxiety between treatment arms.
- To compare changes in quality of life and functioning measures between treatment arms.
- To compare changes in cognitive performance between treatment arms.
- To compare the proportion of participants (EIPT vs. TAU) that is in symptomatic remission at visit 4.
- To compare presence of side effects between treatment arms.
- To compare use of concomitant medication between treatment arms.
- To compare premature discontinuation (timing and reason) between treatment arms.
- To compare changes in suicidal ideation between treatment arms.
Trial design The clinical study is an international, multicenter controlled, randomised, open label trial (with blinded raters), with a treatment duration of four weeks.
Trial population The aim is to recruit 418 subjects with major depressive disorder, without psychotic features. Male and female subjects, in- and out-patients, within the age range of 18 to 65 years old are eligible for participation. The main exclusion criteria are defined to protect the wellbeing of subjects, e.g. being pregnant or breastfeeding, subjects with previous failure on (es)ketamine, meeting any contraindications, or participants with a known intolerance to (es)ketamine.
Interventions
Subjects are randomised to treatment as usual (second-line treatment) or to the early-intensified pharmacological treatment (third-line treatment). Treatment per can be found in the table below:
Table 1. Overview of treatment randomisation per study sample. MDD sample Treatment as Usual (TAU) Switch to second-line antidepressant Early-Intensified Pharmacological Treatment (EIPT) Oral antidepressant plus esketamine nasal spray or esketamine IV or ketamine IV
Ethical considerations relating to the clinical trial including the expected benefit to the individual subject or group of subjects represented by the trial subjects as well as the nature and extent of burden and risks In the current study, clinical practice is mimicked as much as possible to maximize generalizability and for feasibility purposes. To this end, Summaries of Product Characteristics (SmPCs) are followed with regards to contraindications (implemented as exclusion criterion), safety measures and allowed combinations with other medications. Site visits and assessments are kept to a minimum to keep subject burden at an acceptable level, while meeting the objectives of the study. Blood samples for biomarker analyses are only collected when subjects provide consent; safety measures are performed as part of clinical routine.
Use of both EIPT and TAU medications implies that there is a risk of side effects. For TAU, these side effects are well-known, and would be no different from regular clinical practice. For EIPT, there are acute psychotropic effects of (es)ketamine which are considered side effects for this study, such as anxiety, delusional thoughts, dissociation and hallucinations (see IMPDs). In addition, increased blood pressure and heart rate, as well as dizziness and nausea are reported. These acute effect are transient and after 2 hours completely dissipated. Therefore, an observation period of 2 hours after every administration is implemented to monitor this closely. The potential side effects of all treatments are well-known and will be monitored during the study with a standardized side-effect scale (GASE), spontaneous reporting and the local standard procedure regarding other measures such as laboratory tests, physical examinations, ECGs. The results will be captured (as data) and reviewed for tolerability. Most of the tests that will be done as part of standard clinical care (lab tests, ECG, physical examination) for EIPT are also part of TAU.
A benefit of the study is that while ensuring that the tolerability and additional burden remains acceptable, the investigators expect that the larger effect in reducing symptom severity will justify the increase in burden relative to the TAU group. When participants are treated with the intense treatment in earlier stage of the illness (less trial and error before moving on to this treatment option), this is expected to result in a reduced burden of disease for subjects, expressed as less relapses, lower all-cause mortality, hospitalisations and job losses and improved quality of life, in addition to lower societal and healthcare costs as well as preventing patients from turning into a treatment-resistant treatment phase. Last, an advantage of participation could be that subjects will be more thoroughly followed and examined, and that therefore effects and side effects are measured and managed better.
IMPORTANT: the study was submitted to the European authorities before (see NCT05603104) and they requested to split this study into 3 studies (1 for each diagnostic category). The investigators have done this and created 3 new ClinicalTrials.gov studies as well, from which this is one for major depressive disorder. The ClinicalTrial.gov numbers for the other studies are NCT05958875 for INTENSIFY SZ and NCT05973786 for INTENSIFY BD. The site in the UK (London) followed the advice and will submit 3 separate protocols and are therefore included in the current record. However, Israel already submitted this as one protocol. Therefore, the investigators keep the old clinicaltrials.gov number for Israel (NCT05603104).
Study Type
Enrollment (Estimated)
Phase
- Phase 3
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
- Name: Inge Winter, Dr.
- Phone Number: +31875553227
- Email: i.winter@umcutrecht.nl
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Cynthia Okhuijsen-Pfeifer, Dr.
- Phone Number: +31875553227
- Email: c.pfeifer@umcutrecht.nl
Study Locations
-
-
-
Innsbruck, Austria
- Recruiting
- Medical University Innsbruck
-
Contact:
- Alex Hofer, MD, PhD
- Email: a.hofer@i-med.ac.at
-
-
-
-
-
Bielefeld, Germany
- Recruiting
- Universitätsklinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie Bielefeld
-
Contact:
- Martin Driessen, MD, PhD
- Email: martin.driessen@evkb.de
-
Dortmund, Germany, 44287
- Recruiting
- LWL-Klinik Dortmund, Bereich Forschung & Wissenschaft
-
Contact:
- Hans-Jörg Assion, Prof.
- Email: hans-joerg.assion@lwl.org
-
Frankfurt am Main, Germany
- Recruiting
- University Hospital Frankfurt am Main - Goethe University
-
Contact:
- Andreas Reif, MD,PhD
- Email: andreas.reif@kgu.de
-
Münster, Germany
- Recruiting
- Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster
-
Contact:
- Bernhard Baune
- Email: Bernhard.Baune@ukmuenster.de
-
-
-
-
-
Athens, Greece, 11528
- Not yet recruiting
- Eginition hospital, department of psychiatry
-
Contact:
- Nikos Stefanis, Prof.
- Email: nistefan@med.uoa.gr
-
-
-
-
-
Brescia, Italy
- Not yet recruiting
- Università degli Studi di Brescia
-
Contact:
- Antonio Vita, MD, PhD
- Email: antonio.vita@unibs.it
-
Cagliari, Italy
- Recruiting
- University of Cagliari
-
Contact:
- Mirko Manchia, MD, PhD
- Email: mirkomanchia@unica.it
-
Naples, Italy, 80138
- Recruiting
- Università degli Studi della Campania Luigi Vanvitelli
-
Contact:
- Armida Mucci, MD, PhD
- Email: armida.mucci@gmail.com
-
Turin, Italy
- Not yet recruiting
- Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria "Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino"
-
Contact:
- Paola Rocca, MD,PhD
- Email: paola.rocca@unito.it
-
-
-
-
-
Barcelona, Spain
- Recruiting
- Fundació Clínic Per A La Recerca Biomèdica
-
Contact:
- Eduard Vieta, MD, PhD
- Email: EVIETA@clinic.cat
-
-
-
-
-
London, United Kingdom, SE5 8AF
- Not yet recruiting
- King's College London, Psychiatry & Cognitive Neuroscience
-
Contact:
- Allan Young, MD, PhD
- Email: allan.young@kcl.ac.uk
-
Contact:
- Howes Oliver, MD, PhD
- Email: oliver.howes@kcl.ac.uk
-
-
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
- Adult
- Older Adult
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- In- or outpatients, at least 18 years of age up until 65.
- Being willing and able to provide written informed consent. Having a legal guardian to cosign is allowed. Informed consent will be signed at visit 1, before any study procedure.
- Female subjects of child bearing potential must use effective contraception during the trial as per the requirements of the applicable SmPCs and should have a negative pregnancy test at visit 1 or 2 (before randomisation).
- Meeting diagnostic criteria for a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder (without psychotic features), according to DSM-5. The primary diagnosis will be confirmed by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI v7.0.2).
- Subject experiences a treatment failure due to lack of efficacy in the current episode, as confirmed by a CGI-I ≥3; perferably, this treatment is a first-line pharmacotherapeutic agent for the primary DSM-5 diagnosis, and was prescribed for at least 4 weeks within an effective dose range as specified in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPCs).
- Subject and clinician intend to change pharmacotherapeutic treatment. However, other lines of treatment are allowed as well.
A minimum symptom severity threshold needs to be present (moderate level; see below) and subject needs to experience functional impairment.
- The minimum symptom severity threshold is a score of ≥20 on the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS)
- Functional impairment is defined as a score of 5 or higher on any of the three scales of the Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS).
Exclusion criteria:
- Being pregnant or breastfeeding.
- Subject has used (es)ketamine previously for the treatment of depressive symptoms.
- Subject has a known intolerance to (es)ketamine or to all TAU medication.
- Meeting any of the contraindications for (es)ketamine, or to all TAU medication options, as specified within the applicable SmPC, supported by clinically significant abnormal values on local laboratory tests, electrocardiogram (ECG) or physical examinations.
- Subject has participated in another clinical trial in which the subject received an experimental or investigational drug or agent within 30 days before visit 1.
- Subject experiences any other significant disease or disorder which, in the opinion of the investigator, may either put the subjects at risk because of participation in the trial, or may influence the result of the trial, or the subject's ability to participate in the trial.
- Subjects with active suicidal ideation with some intent to act, without specific plan ("Yes" to question 4 of the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS)) or active suicidal ideation with specific plan and intent ("Yes" to question 5 of the C-SSRS), followed by an assessment by the treating clinician who determines it is not safe for the subject to participate in the study
- Subject meets criteria for current substance use disorder, as confirmed by the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI v7.0.2). Nicotine dependency is allowed, as well as mild and moderate alcohol and/or cannabis use disorder (as defined by MINI v7.0.2). Severe alcohol and/or cannabis use disorder are not allowed.
- Subjects have not been committed to an institution by virtue of an order issued either by the judicial or the administrative authorities.
- Subjects dependent on the sponsor, investigator or trial site must be excluded from participation in advance.
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Treatment
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: Single
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / Arm |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: Major Depressive Disorder EIPT: second-line antidepressant + esketamine nasal spray
Major depressive disorder randomized to EIPT: Switch to second-line antidepressant + esketamine nasal spray or (es)ketamine infusion. Antidepressant: Compound, brand, dosage, frequency and duration up to the investigator's discretion (in accordance with SmPC). Esketamine nasal spray: 2 times per week for 4 weeks. Initial dose 28 mg, after that increases can be made with 28 mg per increase (up to 84 mg per week). This decision is up to the investigator's discretion (in accordance with SmPC). (Es)ketamine infusion: performed twice weekly for 4 weeks. Compound, brand up to the investigator's discretion (in accordance with SmPC). |
See arm description
Other Names:
See arm description
Other Names:
See arm description
Other Names:
|
|
Active Comparator: Major Depressive Disorder TAU: second-line antidepressant
Subject with major depressive disorder, randomized to TAU: switch to second-line antidepressant.
When randomized to second-line anti-depressants, this means participants will receive treatment as usual.
The physician has the choice to administer any second-line anti-depressant.
More specification is not possible, as this is a choice the physician makes with the participant based on the characteristic and preference of the participant (in line with standard clinical practice).
|
See arm description
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Comparing the change in symptom severity on Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
Change in symptom severity (EIPT vs. TAU) total score from baseline (visit 2) to end of treatment (visit 4).
This is measured using the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale.
Minimum score is 0, maximum score 60.
A bigger mean change means a better outcome
|
6 weeks
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
To compare changes in cognitive performance as measured through the Trail Making Test
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in cognitive performance as measured through the Trail Making Test between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A lower time to complete the test means better cognitive performance.
|
6 weeks
|
|
Compare proportion of participants that is in symptomatic remission
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
Comparison of the proportion of participants (EIPT vs. TAU) that is in symptomatic remission at visit 4. Remission is defined as a Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating scale score of ≤ 12.
|
6 weeks
|
|
Compare the change in the severity and improvement CGI-S sub-scores
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in the severity sub-score of the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI 2) between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
Higher scores indicate higher illness severity.
Minimum score: 1, maximum score: 7
|
6 weeks
|
|
Compare the change in the severity and improvement CGI-I sub-scores
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in the total improvement sub-score of the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI 2) between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher score means lower treatment improvement.
Minimum score: 1, maximum score: 7
|
6 weeks
|
|
Compare the changes in the levels of depression and anxiety
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in the levels of depression and anxiety as assessed with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
Lower scores mean less depression and anxiety.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes in cognitive performance as measured through the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in cognitive performance as measured through the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher scores means better cognitive performance.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes in subjective cognitive performance as measured through the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in cognitive performance as measured through the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher scores means worse subjective cognitive performance.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes in functioning on the Leuven Affective and Pleasure Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in the functioning measure, Leuven Affective and Pleasure Scale, between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher scores means worse functioning.
Minimum score: 0, Maximum score: 160
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes in functioning on the Sheehan Disability Scale
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To comparechanges in the functioning measure,Sheehan Disability Scale, between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher scores means worse functioning.
Minimum score: 0, maximum score 30.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes in quality of life measure, Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in quality of life measure, Quality of Life Enjoyment and Satisfaction Questionnaire Short Form between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
A higher scores means better quality of life.
Minimum score: 16, maximum score: 80.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the changes of participants in quality of life measure, Quality of Life Scale -100, subscale inner tension
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare changes in quality of life measure, Quality of Life Scale -100, subscale inner tension between the two treatment arms over the four weeks treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
This is a dichotomous scale (unsatisfactory or satisfactory).
More 'satisfactory' answers means higher quality of life.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the frequency of occurrence of side effects between the two treatment arms.
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare presence of side effects as measured through General Assessment of Side Effects Scale and reported spontaneously between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
Higher scores means more side effects.
Minimum score: 0 side effects, maximum score: 38 side effects.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the proportion of participants using concomitant medication between the two treatment arms.
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare use of concomitant medication between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4) effects.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the proportion of participants who prematurely discontinue between the two treatment arms.
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare premature discontinuation between the two treatment arms (EIPT/TAU) over the four week treatment period (visit 2 versus visit 4).
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare the reason of participants that prematurely treatment discontinue the study between the two treatment arms.
Time Frame: 6 weeks
|
To compare the difference in reason of participants that prematurely discontinue the study treatment between the two treatment arms.
|
6 weeks
|
|
To compare changes in suicidal ideation between treatment arms.
Time Frame: 6 weeks.
|
Changes on the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale (C-SSRS) throughout the study; EIPT vs TAU.
Higher scores means higher suicidal ideation.
The maximum score is 5.
|
6 weeks.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Collaborators
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Actual)
Primary Completion (Estimated)
Study Completion (Estimated)
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimated)
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
- 2023-506617-21-00 (EU CT#)
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Sharing Supporting Information Type
- STUDY_PROTOCOL
- CSR
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.