International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, Page 1 of 16.

Copyright f CINP 2009

doi:10.1017/S1461145709990423

Extended-release quetiapine fumarate

(quetiapine XR): a once-daily monotherapy
eective in generalized anxiety disorder.
Data from a randomized, double-blind,
placebo- and active-controlled study

ARTICLE

CINP

Borwin Bandelow1, Guy Chouinard2, Julio Bobes3, Antti Ahokas4, Ivan Eggens5,
Sherry Liu6 and Hans Eriksson 6
1

Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Goettingen, Germany

Departments of Psychiatry and Medicine, Universite de Montreal and McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada
3
Department of Psychiatry, University of Oviedo, Oviedo, Asturias, Spain
4
Mehilainen Clinic, Helsinki, Finland
5
AstraZeneca R&D Sodertalje, Sweden
6
AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE, USA
2

Abstract
The ecacy and tolerability of extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) once-daily monotherapy in generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) was assessed. This multicentre, double-blind, randomized,
placebo- and active-controlled, phase III trial consisted of a 1- to 4-wk enrolment/wash-out period and a
10-wk (8-wk active treatment, 2-wk post-treatment drug-discontinuation) study period ; 873 patients were
randomized to 50 mg or 150 mg quetiapine XR, 20 mg paroxetine, or placebo. Primary endpoint was
change from randomization at week 8 in Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) total score. At
week 8, all active agents produced signicant improvements in HAMA total and psychic subscale scores
vs. placebo ; HAMA somatic subscale scores were signicantly reduced only by 150 mg quetiapine XR.
Signicant separation from placebo (x2.90) in HAMA total score was observed at day 4 for 50 mg
quetiapine XR (x4.43, p<0.001) and 150 mg quetiapine XR (3.86, p<0.05), but not for paroxetine (2.69).
Remission (HAMA total score f7) rates at week 8 were signicantly higher for 150 mg quetiapine XR
(42.6 %, p<0.01) and paroxetine (38.8 %, p<0.05) vs. placebo (27.2 %). The most common adverse events
(AEs) were dry mouth, somnolence, fatigue, dizziness, and headache, for quetiapine XR, and nausea,
headache, dizziness for paroxetine. A lower proportion of patients reported sexual dysfunction with
quetiapine XR [0.9 % (50 mg), 1.8 % (150 mg)] than with placebo (2.3 %) or paroxetine (7.4 %). The incidence
of AEs potentially related to extrapyramidal symptoms was : quetiapine XR : 50 mg, 6.8 %, 150 mg, 5.0 % ;
placebo, 1.8 % ; and paroxetine, 8.4 %. Once-daily quetiapine XR is an eective and generally well-tolerated
treatment for patients with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early as day 4.
Received 15 December 2008 ; Reviewed 2 March 2009 ; Revised 25 June 2009 ; Accepted 10 July 2009
Key words : Extended-release quetiapine fumarate, generalized anxiety disorder, randomized, placeboand active-controlled study, monotherapy, once-daily.

Introduction
Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a prevalent and
chronic illness, having high comorbidity with psychiatric disorders, particularly depression, and physical
Address for correspondence : Professor Dr B. Bandelow,
Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of
Goettingen, Von-Siebold-Str. 5, D-37075 Goettingen, Germany.
Tel. : +49-551-396607 Fax : +49-551-398952
Email : [email protected]

illness (Nutt et al. 2006). GAD is also associated with

signicant functional impairment and reduced quality
of life (Ninan, 2001).
Based on clinical studies in the 1970s and 1980s,
conventional antipsychotics were prescribed in
Europe for patients with anxiety disorders (Mendels
et al. 1986 ; Rickels et al. 1978 ; Yamamoto et al. 1973),
but at lower doses than for the treatment of
schizophrenia (Mendels et al. 1986). However, in the
USA, conventional antipsychotics were not generally

B. Bandelow et al.

used, and were never licensed, for the treatment of

GAD.
Currently, the preferred long-term treatment
options for GAD include selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs ; Allgulander et al. 2004)
and serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors
(SNRIs ; Gelenberg et al. 2000), with benzodiazepines
(Chouinard, 2004) used in the short term. In Europe,
the calcium channel modulator pregabalin is licensed
for the treatment of GAD, but this agent was not
approved by the US Food and Drug Administration.
Additionally, buspirone is licensed for, and often
prescribed for, GAD, although the ecacy data are
inconsistent (Bandelow et al. 2008).
The search for alternative treatment options is warranted since <40 % of patients with GAD achieve recovery despite receiving pharmacotherapy with SSRIs,
benzodiazepines or other antidepressants (Rubio &
Lopez-Ibor, 2007). Although there is a paucity of randomized, controlled studies examining treatment
strategies for patients with symptomatic GAD following rst-line therapy, case-report data suggest
that combination therapy with antidepressants and
benzodiazepines may be eective (Pollack, 2001).
SSRIs and SNRIs have a delayed onset of action
(24 wk) (Allgulander et al. 2004 ; Gelenberg et al. 2000 ;
Rickels et al. 2003), thus short-term adjunct benzodiazepine therapy is common when initiating treatment
with these agents. For benzodiazepines, cognitive effects, rebound anxiety, withdrawal symptoms, and
abuse potential, limit their use in clinical practice
(Chouinard, 2004), while SSRIs and SNRIs are associated with sexual dysfunction (Bandelow et al. 2008)
and discontinuation eects (Fava et al. 2007).
Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine
XR) oers a potential treatment option for GAD. While
an augmentation study with a small sample size (6/11
patients completed) reported no additional benet
when quetiapine was added to paroxetine controlled
release (Simon et al. 2008), other studies have reported
positive ecacy results for quetiapine as either
monotherapy or adjunct therapy in patients with GAD
(Adson et al. 2004 ; Galynker et al. 2005 ; Katzman et al.
2008b). This study evaluated the ecacy and tolerability of quetiapine XR as once-daily monotherapy
for GAD.

Method
Study design
This was a 10-wk multicentre, double-blind, parallelgroup, placebo- and active- (paroxetine) controlled

study. Paroxetine was included for assay sensitivity. After withdrawal of previous medication during a 1- to 4-wk enrolment/wash-out period, eligible
patients entered an 8-wk, randomized, active treatment period, followed by a 2-wk drug-discontinuation
phase.
The study was approved by institutional review
boards for each study site and performed in accordance with the WMA Declaration of Helsinki and
the International Conference on Harmonization/Good
Clinical Practice guidelines. After complete description of the study to the patients, written informed
consent was obtained.
Patients
Eligible patients were male or female (1865 yr), with
a documented diagnosis of GAD according to DSMIV-TR criteria 300.02, as assessed by the MiniInternational Neuropsychiatric Interview.
Patients were required to have a Hamilton Rating
Scale for Anxiety (HAMA) total score o20 with
item 1 (anxious mood) and item 2 (tension) scores o2
[administered using the Structured Interview Guide
sberg
for the HAMA (SIGH-A)], a MontgomeryA
Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score
f16, and a Clinical Global Impression Severity of
Illness (CGI-S) score o4 at enrolment and randomization.
Exclusion criteria included : diagnosis of any DSMIV-TR Axis I disorder other than GAD within 6
months prior to enrolment or any DSM-IV-TR Axis II
disorder that could interfere with the patients ability
to participate in the study, a current serious suicidal or
homicidal risk or a MADRS item 10 (suicidality) score
o4 or a suicide attempt during the 6 months prior
to enrolment, substance or alcohol abuse within 6
months prior to enrolment or a clinically signicant
deviation from reference ranges in clinical laboratory
test results.
Prior to randomization, patients could not have
received : antipsychotic, hypnotic, or antidepressant
medications (including benzodiazepines) within 7 d ;
monoamine oxidase inhibitors or mood stabilizers
within 14 d ; or uoxetine within 28 d. Patients were
permitted to receive psychotherapy during the study
period if it had been ongoing for a minimum of 3
months prior to randomization.
Patients were assigned an enrolment code and a
centre-specic randomization schedule was prepared
from which allocation-numbered drug kits were
packaged and shipped to centres. Patients were randomized to 50 mg or 150 mg quetiapine XR, 20 mg

Quetiapine XR for GAD

paroxetine, or placebo, in a ratio of 1 : 1 : 1 : 1. The randomization list was generated using an internally
developed and validated computer-based randomization system.
Packaging was identical for all study treatments ;
placebo tablets for quetiapine XR were identical to
50 mg quetiapine XR. Paroxetine placebo capsules
were identical to 20 mg paroxetine over-encapsulated
tablets. A double-dummy method was used to ensure
that the number of tablets/capsules dispensed was the
same across all treatment groups. Study treatments
were administered orally, once-daily in the evening.
All patients randomized to 50 mg quetiapine XR or
20 mg paroxetine were initiated and maintained at this
dose. Patients randomized to 150 mg quetiapine XR
started at 50 mg on day 1, and increased to their target
dose of 150 mg (3r50 mg tablets) on day 3. All treatments were discontinued at the end of the study, with
no down-titration of dose.
Concomitant medication
Use of other psychoactive medication was not permitted, except medications for insomnia. The following medications were permitted twice weekly up to
week 2, but not on the night before study assessments :
10 mg zolpidem tartrate, 1 g chloral hydrate, 20 mg
zaleplon, 7.5 mg zopiclone. During the randomized
treatment period, centrally acting anticholinergics
were permitted for extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS),
but were not given prophylactically.
Ecacy evaluations
The primary ecacy variable was mean change in
HAMA total score from randomization at week 8.
Additional evaluations included change in HAMA
total score from randomization at day 4 and throughout, HAMA response (o50 % decrease in total score
from randomization) rate and change from randomization in HAMA psychic and somatic cluster scores at
day 4 and week 8, and HAMA remission (total score
f7) rate, CGI-S score, proportion of patients with a
CGI-S score of 1 ( normal, not ill at all ), proportion of
patients with a CGI-Improvement (CGI-I) score of 1 or
2 ( very much/much improved ), and change from
randomization in MADRS total score at week 8.
Quality of sleep was assessed at randomization and
week 8 using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index
(PSQI ; Buysse et al. 1989).
A post-hoc analysis was conducted to evaluate
the dierence in HAMA total scores between patients
receiving quetiapine XR (pooled doses) with and

without adverse events (AEs) relating to somnolence

(including sedation, lethargy or sluggishness).
Clinical assessments of HAMA, CGI-S, and MADRS
total scores were conducted at enrolment (visit 1,
baseline), day 1 (visit 2, randomization), day 4 (visit 3),
and at weeks 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8 (visits 49). CGI-I scores
were determined at visits 39. To ensure consistency
throughout the study, each rater administering the
HAMA, MADRS, and CGI scales received training in
conducting these assessments. Certication was required for HAMA and MADRS scale assessment administration and raters were approved by the sponsor.
For CGI scales, rater training was required to conduct
these assessments. To reduce scoring variability, it
was also recommended that the same rater conduct all
assessments for a given patient for a specic scale.
Only qualied physician raters administered the CGI.
Rater training was performed by United BioSource
Corporation (USA), who independently demonstrated
high levels of inter-rater agreement (k=0.889) in this
study (Kott et al. 2008).
Safety and tolerability assessments
The incidence, severity, and withdrawals because of
AEs were recorded throughout. All AEs and serious
AEs (SAEs), including any ongoing at study end or
discontinuation, were followed up until resolution or
until the investigator decided that no further followup was necessary. Tolerability was assessed through
physical examination and 12-lead electrocardiogram
(ECG) recordings (enrolment and week 8), laboratory
measurements (enrolment, week 4, week 8), and recording of body weight, vital signs, and concomitant
medication (enrolment and all subsequent visits). The
self-administered, 14-item Changes in Sexual Functioning Questionnaire (CSFQ) was completed at randomization and weeks 2, 4, and 8, with separate
versions for males and females (Keller et al. 2006).
Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS) and Simpson
Angus Scale (SAS) scores were assessed at randomization and weeks 2, 4, 6, and 8. All investigators
performing BARS and SAS ratings received instructions on how to use these scales and it was recommended that the same rater conduct all assessments for a
given patient.
During the 2-wk drug-discontinuation phase, treatment discontinuation signs and symptoms (TDSS)
were measured using a modied 18-item TDSS scale
(Michelson et al. 2000), which included the additional
AEs vomiting, nausea, and insomnia. Patients completing the randomized period were asked to rate
discontinuation symptoms using the TDSS scale on
post-treatment days 1, 3, 5, 7, and 14. During the

B. Bandelow et al.

drug-discontinuation phase patients were encouraged

not to take any medication for anxiety.

statistics were provided for all variables. Statistical

analyses were two-sided and p values <5 % denoted
statistical signicance.

Statistical analysis
Intent-to-treat (ITT) populations include all randomized patients who received o1 dose of study drug,
and had o1 post-treatment HAMA ; for the analysis of
primary and secondary ecacy variables in this study,
a modied ITT (MITT) population was used, which
had the additional criteria of a valid baseline HAMA
total score assessment. The drug-discontinuationphase (TDSS) population included patients who
completed 8 wk of double-blind treatment and had
baseline (week 8) and o1 post-baseline TDSS assessments. The safety population included patients who
received o1 dose of study drug.
The target sample size was 186 patients per treatment group based on an anticipated treatment difference of 2.75 units from placebo and a standard
deviation (S.D.) of 7.5 for the change in the primary
outcome variable. This sample size provided a 90 %
power to show that either quetiapine XR dose was
dierent from placebo. The study was not powered for
a comparison of quetiapine XR vs. paroxetine.
The statistical signicance of change in HAMA total
scores from randomization at week 8 (primary ecacy
variable) was determined using an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model that included terms for baseline score, treatment, and centre, and used the last
observation carried forward (LOCF) approach for imputation of missing data. For the change in HAMA
total scores at each time-point, statistical signicance
was determined for observed case (OC) data using
the mixed model repeated-measures (MMRM) analysis, which included terms for treatment, baseline
HAMA total score, visit, and treatment/visit interaction.
To ensure the overall signicance level of 0.05 was
preserved for the primary variable, a Bonferroni
Holm multiple testing procedure (MTP) for groups of
hypotheses was applied to both quetiapine XR treatment groups. Pairwise dierences between the least
squares means (LSMs) for quetiapine XR treatment
groups and placebo were calculated and nominal 95 %
condence intervals (CIs) provided. Comparisons between paroxetine and placebo were not adjusted for
multiplicity.
All other continuous variables were analysed using
the same ANCOVA model as the primary ecacy
variable, without adjustment for multiplicity. Binary
data were analysed using logistic regression, with
centre included as a random eect. Descriptive

Results
Patient population
Of 1054 recruited patients, 873 patients met the inclusion criteria and were randomized to receive 50 mg
quetiapine XR (n=221), 150 mg quetiapine XR
(n=218), paroxetine (n=217), or placebo (n=217) at
centres in Europe [Bulgaria (76 patients, nine centres),
Czech Republic (113 patients, 10 centres), Denmark (58
patients, four centres), Finland (85 patients, six
centres), France (109 patients, 11 centres), Germany (35
patients, eight centres), Norway (16 patients, four
centres), Romania (48 patients, ve centres), Slovakia
(27 patients, six centres), Spain (19 patients, four
centres), Sweden (39 patients, six centres)], Argentina
(59 patients, 11 centres), Canada (95 patients, 17
centres), Mexico (25 patients, four centres), and South
Africa (69 patients, seven centres) between 18 May
2006 and 15 February 2007. The safety population
comprised 870 patients (three patients did not receive
treatment) and the MITT population included 866
patients (four additional patients were excluded due
to missing/invalid baseline or post-randomization
HAMA total scores).
The demographic and clinical characteristics of
the treatment groups were generally well matched
(Table 1). The proportion of patients completing the
10-wk study and reasons for early withdrawal are
shown in Fig. 1.
Before study entry, 12.1 %, 2.8 %, and 15.1 % of
patients were receiving SSRIs, SNRIs, or benzodiazepines, respectively. The percentage of patients receiving concomitant sleep medication at any time (weeks
18) was : 50 mg quetiapine XR f1.5 %, 150 mg
quetiapine XR f3.2 %, paroxetine f3.3 %, and placebo
f3.8 %.
Ecacy
HAMA total scores were signicantly reduced from
randomization at week 8 for 50 mg quetiapine XR
(x13.95, p<0.05), 150 mg quetiapine XR (x15.96,
p<0.001), and paroxetine (x14.45, p<0.01) vs. placebo
(x12.30) (Table 2, Fig. 2 a). The level of signicance
(determined by MTP analysis) for 50 mg and 150 mg
quetiapine XR vs. placebo was pf0.05 and pf0.025,
respectively.
HAMA total scores were signicantly reduced with
50 mg quetiapine XR (x4.43, p<0.001) and 150 mg

Quetiapine XR for GAD

Table 1. Demographics and baseline characteristics (modied intent-to-treat population)

Quetiapine XR
50 mg
(n=219)

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
(n=216)

Paroxetine
20 mg
(n=214)

Placebo
(n=217)

Gender, n ( %)
Male
Female

70 (32.0)
149 (68.0)

72 (33.3)
144 (66.7)

76 (35.5)
138 (64.5)

82 (37.8)
135 (62.2)

Age, yr
Mean (S.D.)
Range

40.7 (11.6)
18 to 65

42.3 (12.4)
18 to 65

41.6 (11.8)
19 to 64

41.2 (12.8)
18 to 65

Ethnicity, n ( %)
White
Black
Asian
Other

202 (92.2)
9 (4.1)
1 (0.5)
7 (3.2)

206 (95.4)
9 (4.2)
0 (0.0)
1 (0.5)

205 (95.8)
9 (4.2)
0 (0.0)
0 (0.0)

204 (94.0)
10 (4.6)
0 (0.0)
3 (1.4)

Weight, mean (S.D.) kg

BMI, mean (S.D.) kg/m2

72.1 (16.9)
25.4 (5.2)

73.2 (17.3)
25.9 (5.7)

74.6 (17.4)
26.1 (5.6)

74.6 (17.7)
25.9 (5.2)

Time since rst onset of anxiety symptoms

Mean (S.D.), yr
Min to max

12.1 (11.6)
1 to 52

11.4 (11.2)
1 to 56

11.3 (11.1)
1 to 52

11.4 (11.6)
1 to 55

26.9 (4.2)
20 to 44

26.6 (4.2)
14 to 42

27.1 (4.0)
20 to 43

27.3 (4.4)
20 to 40

11.5 (3.2)
0 to 16

11.3 (3.1)
0 to 19

11.3 (3.1)
2 to 20

11.5 (3.4)
2 to 25

4.8 (0.7)
4 to 6

4.8 (0.7)
3 to 6

4.8 (0.7)
4 to 7

4.8 (0.7)
4 to 6

Rating scale scores

HAMA total
Mean (S.D.)
Min to max
MADRS total
Mean (S.D.)
Min to max
CGI-S
Mean (S.D.)
Min to max

sberg Depression Rating Scale ;

BMI, Body mass index ; HAMA, Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety ; MADRS, MontgomeryA
CGI-S, Clinical Global Impression Severity of Illness.

quetiapine XR (x3.86, p<0.05) vs. placebo (x2.90) at

day 4, and each subsequent visit (Fig. 2 b).
At day 4, HAMA response rates were signicantly
greater with 50 mg quetiapine XR vs. placebo ; at week
8 they were signicantly greater for all active treatment groups vs. placebo (Table 2). Remission rates at
week 8 were signicantly greater with 150 mg quetiapine XR and paroxetine vs. placebo (Table 2).
The results for other secondary ecacy variables
are shown in Table 2. At week 8, both doses of quetiapine XR were associated with signicant improvements in CGI-S, HAMA psychic cluster, PSQI global,
and MADRS total scores vs. placebo, while signicant
improvements in HAMA somatic cluster scores and
the proportion of patients with a CGI-I score o2
occurred with 150 mg quetiapine XR.

Post-hoc analysis of HAMA total score and

somnolence
The change in HAMA total score from randomization
at week 8 was similar for patients receiving quetiapine
XR with (x14.90, n=133) or without (x14.95, n=302)
reporting AEs related to somnolence, and signicantly
greater than for placebo (x12.29, n=217, pf0.01 and
pf0.001, respectively).
Safety and tolerability
10-wk study period (8-wk randomized treatment and
2-wk drug-discontinuation phase)
The overall incidence of AEs reported by patients
( %) was higher in active treatment groups (quetiapine

B. Bandelow et al.
Patients screened (N=1054)

181
Screen failures
7
Lost to follow-up
3
Adverse event
1
Death
Eligibility criteria not fulfilled 108
Patient not willing to continue 60
1
Severe non-adherence
1
Other

Patients screened (N=873)

Quetiapine XR
50 mga
n=221

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
n=218

Paroxetine
20 mgb
n=217

Placebo
n=217

n=57

n=55

n=44

n=41

n=2
n=25
n=1

n=3
n=32
n=0

n=3
n=16
n=1

n=1
n=8
n=0

n=13
n=9
n=1
n=5
n=1

n=8
n=1
n=1
n=7
n=3

n=15
n=4
n=1
n=2
n=2

n=14
n=13
n=0
n=3
n=2

Completed 8-wk
randomized treatment period

n=164

n=163

n=173

n=176

Enrolled in 2-wk TDSS phase

n=126

n=124

n=137

n=133

Completed 10-wk study

n=115

n=113

n=119

n=126

Discontinued 8-wk
randomized period
Lost to follow-up
Adverse event
Development of study-specific
discontinuation criteria
Patient not willing to continue
Lack of therapeutic response
Eligibility criteria not fulfilled
Severe non-adherence
Other

Fig. 1. Participant ow. a One patient was not treated. b Two patients were not treated. These patients were included in the
discontinued-from-study drug analysis set but were not included in the safety analysis.

XR : 50 mg, 70.9 % ; 150 mg, 76.1 % ; paroxetine, 72.6 %)

compared to placebo (55.8 %). The incidence of SAEs
was low in all treatment groups (<1.4 %) and none
were considered treatment-related. The percentage
of AEs considered treatment-related was higher in
the quetiapine XR (50 mg, 58.6 % ; 150 mg, 65.6 %) and
paroxetine (58.6 %) groups compared to placebo
(34.6 %). Discontinuations due to an AE were 11.8 %,
16.1 %, 7.9 %, and 4.1 % in the 50-mg and 150-mg
quetiapine XR, paroxetine, and placebo groups, respectively.
8-wk randomized treatment period
Table 3 shows AEs (treatment-related or not) occurring in >5 % of patients and AEs potentially related to
sexual dysfunction or EPS.
The most frequent AEs leading to discontinuation
were fatigue (n=7) and somnolence (n=6) (50 mg

quetiapine XR), somnolence (n=11) and fatigue (n=7)

(150 mg quetiapine XR), insomnia (n=5), and dizziness and fatigue (each n=4) (paroxetine) ; no AE
leading to withdrawal occurred in >1 patient in the
placebo group.
There was a slight improvement in sexual functioning in all treatment groups. The largest improvements (OC) in CSFQ occurred in the quetiapine XR
groups [mean (S.D.) change : 50 mg, 2.3 (7.4), 150 mg,
2.1 (8.1), paroxetine, 0.7 (7.0), placebo, 1.1 (6.6)] and
were similar by gender, with a numerical advantage
for females with quetiapine XR over placebo and
paroxetine.
At week 8, across treatment groups mean decreases
in SAS and BARS were x0.1 to x0.2, and x0.1, respectively. During the randomized treatment period,
centrally acting anticholinergics were used at any
week by f0.5 % (placebo), f0.6 % [quetiapine XR
(both doses)], and f1.1 % (paroxetine) of patients.

Quetiapine XR for GAD

At week 8, there were no clinically relevant mean
changes from baseline in vital signs, ECG, haematology, or clinical laboratory parameters ; however,
higher mean increases in supine pulse and ECG heart
rate were observed with 150 mg quetiapine XR, compared to placebo. Mean changes in glucose and lipid
parameters, and weight, and clinically relevant shifts
in these parameters, are shown in Table 3.
2-wk drug-discontinuation phase
Of the patients completing the 8-wk randomized
treatment period, 76.8 % (50 mg quetiapine XR), 76.1 %
(150 mg quetiapine XR), 79.2 % (paroxetine), and 75.6 %
(placebo) enrolled in the 2-wk drug-discontinuation
phase (Fig. 1). Five patients discontinued due to
AEs during the post-treatment period : quetiapine XR
150 mg, n=3 [moderate vertigo, moderate sedation,
and mild depression (same patient), moderate nausea], paroxetine, n=1 (severe back pain), and placebo,
n=1 (severe peritonitis). Table 2 shows mean TDSS
total scores.
The most frequently reported AEs during the drugdiscontinuation phase were insomnia and nausea for
quetiapine XR (both doses), and dizziness and anxiety
for paroxetine (Table 3).

Discussion
This is the rst randomized, placebo-controlled study
to evaluate the ecacy of quetiapine XR for the treatment of GAD in a large patient population. These results demonstrate that quetiapine XR (50 mg and
150 mg) is an eective once-daily monotherapy for the
treatment of outpatients with GAD. Although the
study was not powered for a statistical non-inferiority
comparison with paroxetine, changes in ecacy variables observed with quetiapine XR were of at least the
same magnitude as those for paroxetine. The eect of
quetiapine XR on reducing symptoms of anxiety was
greater than that for placebo and this dierence was
observed as early as day 4. Signicant separation from
placebo was only seen at week 2 with paroxetine.
At day 4, statistically signicant dierences from
placebo were seen with quetiapine XR on a number of
outcome variables (HAMA total, psychic, and somatic
scores, HAMA response rate, and CGI-S), but not
with paroxetine. Although currently recommended
as rst-line for the long-term treatment of GAD,
SSRIs and SNRIs have a 24 wk delay in onset of
action (Gelenberg et al. 2000 ; Rickels et al. 2003). To
date, pregabalin and (high-potency) benzodiazepines
are the only other agents to demonstrate anxiolytic

ecacy by week 1 (Montgomery, 2006 ; Rickels et al.

2005). However, as benzodiazepines are associated
with dependency, rebound, and withdrawal issues
(Chouinard, 2004), the early onset of response and
apparent infrequent occurrence of withdrawal symptoms observed with quetiapine XR in this study are of
benet to patients experiencing anxiety symptoms.
The improvement in HAMA total, psychic, and somatic scores demonstrate that quetiapine XR is eective across a wide range of anxiety symptoms. The
benecial eect of paroxetine in treating somatic
symptoms associated with GAD has been investigated
in several studies (Ball et al. 2005 ; Pollack et al. 2001 ;
Rickels et al. 2003). In the present study, paroxetine did
not signicantly improve somatic symptoms compared to placebo ; however, our study was not designed or powered to test this hypothesis.
In addition to psychic and somatic symptoms, sleep
disturbances are commonly reported by patients with
GAD (Papadimitriou & Linkowski, 2005). Quetiapine
XR was associated with signicant improvements in
sleep (PSQI global scores) and numerical improvements across a range of PSQI items (including sleep
quality, latency, duration, habitual sleep ecacy, sleep
disturbances, and frequency of sleep medication)
compared to placebo. In the present study, patients
randomized to receive paroxetine did not report signicant improvements in sleep quality compared to
placebo. In other placebo-controlled studies of paroxetine in patients with GAD, somnolence (15 %) and
insomnia (11 %) were the most frequently reported
nervous system AEs (GlaxoSmithKline, 2008) and
these AEs occurred at similar rates in the present
study. As would be expected based on data from previous clinical trials, both doses of quetiapine XR
(50 mg and 150 mg) were associated with a higher incidence of somnolence (21.8 %, 25.2 %, respectively)
than insomnia (3.2 %, 0.9 %, respectively). Identifying
and helping patients with GAD who experience sleep
disturbance are important components of the overall
care for this disorder (Benca, 2001).
In this study, 23.5 % of all patients receiving quetiapine XR reported somnolence as an AE, with an
early time to onset. While somnolence may have inuenced early improvements in PSQI scores, post-hoc
analysis of the primary endpoint in patients reporting
somnolence-related AEs, suggests that improvement
in anxiety symptoms is related to an anxiolytic eect
rather than somnolence.
Approximately 62 % of patients with GAD have comorbid depression during their lifetime (Judd et al.
1998). Although patients fullling the criteria for a
current episode of major depression were excluded

B. Bandelow et al.

Table 2. Results for change from randomization at day 4 or week 8 for ecacy variables (MITT population ; LOCF), quality of life
sleep measures (PSQI ; MITT population ; LOCF), MADRS total scores (safety population ; LOCF), and treatment withdrawal
(TDSS) scores at post-treatment days 1, 7, and 14 (TDSS population ; OC)

HAMA total score

Day 4
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
Week 8
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
HAMA response ratea
Day 4, n ( %)
Week 8, n ( %)
HAMA remission rateb
Week 8, n ( %)
HAMA psychic clusterc
Day 4
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
Week 8
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
HAMA somatic clusterd
Day 4
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
Week 8
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
CGI-S
Day 4
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)

Quetiapine XR
50 mg
(n=219)

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
(n=216)

Paroxetine
20 mg
(n=214)

x4.43
x1.53
(x2.32 to x0.75)
p<0.001

x3.86
x0.96
(x1.75 to x0.18)
p<0.05

x2.69
0.21
(x0.57 to 0.99)
p=0.593

x13.95
x1.65
(x3.12 to x0.18)
p<0.05

x15.96
x3.66
(x5.13 to x2.19)
p<0.001

x14.45
x2.15
(x3.63 to x0.68)
p<0.01

12 (6.4)
p<0.05
137 (62.6)
p<0.05

7 (3.7)
p=0.068
153 (70.8)
p<0.001

5 (2.6)
p=0.139
141 (65.9)
p<0.01

71 (32.4)
p=0.282

92 (42.6)
p<0.01

83 (38.8)
p<0.05

x2.53
x0.95
(x1.42 to x0.48)
p<0.001

x2.38
x0.80
(x1.26 to x0.33)
p<0.001

x1.56
0.02
(x0.45 to 0.48)
p=0.937

x1.58

x7.42
x1.15
(x1.97 to x0.33)
p<0.01

x8.64
x2.37
(x3.19 to x1.55)
p<0.001

x7.70
x1.43
(x2.25 to x0.61)
p<0.001

x6.27

x1.86
x0.57
(x1.03 to x0.11)
p<0.05

x1.45
x0.16
(x0.63 to 0.30)
p=0.482

x1.09
0.20
(x0.26 to 0.66)
p=0.395

x1.29

x6.54
x0.54
(x1.27 to 0.20)
p=0.153

x7.37
x1.37
(x2.11 to x0.63)
p<0.001

x6.74
x0.74
(x1.48 to x0.00)
p=0.050

x6.00

x0.38
x0.18
(x0.28 to x0.07)
p<0.01

x0.35
x0.15
(x0.26 to x0.04)
p<0.01

x0.24
0.04
(x0.15 to 0.07)
p=0.498

x0.20

Placebo
(n=217)

x2.90

x12.30

1 (0.5)
113 (52.1)

59 (27.2)

Quetiapine XR for GAD

Table 2 (cont.)

Week 8
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs.
placebo (95 % CI)
Week 8 : CGI-S score of 1, n ( %)
CGI-I
Week 8 : CGI-I score of 1 or 2,
n ( %)
PSQI (Week 8)
Global score, LSM change (95 % CI)

Sleep quality, mean change (S.D.)

Sleep latency, mean change (S.D.)
Sleep duration, mean change (S.D.)
Habitual sleep eciency, mean change (S.D.)
Sleep disturbances, mean change (S.D.)
Frequency of sleep medication,
mean change (S.D.)
Daytime dysfunction, mean change (S.D.)
MADRS total scoree
Week 8
LSM change
Estimated dierence vs
placebo (95 % CI)

Quetiapine XR
50 mg
(n=219)

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
(n=216)

Paroxetine
20 mg
(n=214)

x1.85
x0.32
(x0.55 to x0.09)
p<0.01

x2.10
x0.57
(x0.80 to x0.34)
p<0.001

x1.95
x0.42
(x0.65 to x0.18)
p<0.001

x1.53

43 (19.6)

49 (22.7)

39 (18.2)

27 (12.4)

140 (63.9)

154 (71.3)

140 (65.4)

121 (55.8)

p=0.082

p<0.01

p<0.05

x4.42
(x4.97 to x3.86)
p<0.001
x1.0 (0.9)
x1.0 (1.2)
x0.8 (1.0)
x0.8 (1.3)
x0.6 (0.7)
x0.5 (1.1)

x4.55
(x5.10 to x4.00)
p<0.001
x1.1 (0.9)
x1.0 (1.2)
x0.8 (0.9)
x0.7 (1.4)
x0.6 (0.7)
x0.2 (1.1)

x3.29
(x3.84 to x2.73)
p=0.099
x0.8 (1.0)
x0.8 (1.1)
x0.5 (1.1)
x0.6 (1.4)
x0.5 (0.7)
x0.2 (1.0)

x2.73
(x3.28 to x2.18)

x0.4 (0.8)

x0.4 (0.9)

x0.7 (0.9)

x0.5 (0.9)

x4.14
x1.40
(x2.39 to x0.41)
p<0.01

x5.64
x2.90
(x3.89 to x1.90)
p<0.001

x4.63
x1.89
(x2.89 to x0.90)
p<0.001

x2.74

(n=126)
2.3 (3.2)
2.7 (3.2)
2.7 (3.2)

(n=124)
2.1 (2.0)
3.2 (3.2)
2.7 (2.9)

(n=137)
1.4 (2.0)
4.3 (3.9)
3.7 (3.7)

(n=133)
1.5 (1.7)
2.3 (2.4)
2.5 (2.8)

Placebo
(n=217)

x0.5 (0.8)
x0.5 (1.0)
x0.5 (0.8)
x0.6 (1.4)
x0.3 (0.7)
x0.2 (1.0)

TDSS total scoref

Post-treatment day 1
Post-treatment day 7
Post-treatment day 14

MITT, Modied intent-to-treat ; LOCF, last observation carried forward ; PSQI, Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index ; MADRS,
sberg Depression Rating Scale ; TDSS, treatment discontinuation signs and symptoms ; OC, observed case ;
MontgomeryA
HAMA, Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety ; CI, condence interval ; LSM, least squares means ; CGI-S, Clinical Global
Impression Severity of Illness ; CGI-I, Clinical Global Impression Improvement.
All p values vs. placebo.
a
o50 % reduction in HAMA total score from baseline.
b
HAMA total score f7.
c
Consisting of the following items : anxious mood, tension, fears, insomnia, intellectual changes, depressed mood, and
behaviour symptoms.
d
Consisting of the following items : muscular, sensory and cardiovascular, respiratory, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, and
autonomic system disturbances.
e
Safety population.
f
Observed cases ; drug-discontinuation phase population.

10

B. Bandelow et al.

(a)

Day 4

Week 8

***

10
Improvement

LSM change from randomization

15

20

Placebo (n=217)
Quetiapine XR 50 mg (n=219)
Quetiapine XR 150 mg (n=216)
Paroxetine 20 mg (n=214)

**
***

(b)
Placebo (n=217)
Quetiapine XR 50 mg (n=219)

Quetiapine XR 150 mg (n=216)

***
**

Paroxetine 20 mg (n=214)

***
**

10
Improvement

LSM change from randomization

**
***
**

15

*
**

***
***
**

20
Day 4

***
***
**

***
***
**

Week
Fig. 2. Change in HAMA total score from randomization. (a) At day 4 and week 8 (MITT population ; LOCF) ; * p<0.05,
** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 vs. placebo ; # p value adjusted for multiplicity. (b) Over time (MITT population ; OC, MMRM) ;
* p<0.05, ** p<0.01, *** p<0.001 vs. placebo.

from this study, improvements in MADRS total scores

indicate that quetiapine XR monotherapy reduces depressive symptoms in non-depressed patients with
GAD compared to placebo ; paroxetine also improved
MADRS total scores.
AEs were reported by patients in all treatment
groups. The pattern of common AEs, incidence of AEs
of special interest, and changes in clinical laboratory
results and vital signs for the quetiapine XR treatment
groups were consistent with the known pharmacological and safety prole of quetiapine (Arvanitis et al.
1997 ; Timdahl et al. 2007). In this study, the proportion
of patients reporting AEs related to sexual dysfunction
was higher for paroxetine than for either quetiapine
XR dose or placebo.
The incidence of spontaneously reported EPSrelated AEs with quetiapine XR was low and these

were generally mild to moderate in intensity. These

results were conrmed by the assessment of parkinsonian and akathisia symptoms using SAS and BARS
scores, which indicated a similar magnitude of change
in the quetiapine XR (50 mg, 150 mg) and placebo
treatment groups. While atypical antipsychotics are
associated with a lower risk for EPS than conventional
antipsychotics, it is important that patients are monitored for the emergence of events potentially related
to EPS (Casey, 2006). EPS-like symptoms have also
been reported with SSRI and SNRI treatments (Leo,
1996) and in the present study paroxetine was associated with a higher incidence of EPS-related AEs
than either quetiapine XR or placebo.
Laboratory data revealed no clinically relevant
changes in glucose, total cholesterol, high-density
lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein

Quetiapine XR for GAD

(LDL)-cholesterol, or triglycerides in patients receiving quetiapine XR ; however, large variability in these
data limits interpretation. Numerical increases in glucose levels and triglycerides were seen in this trial for
quetiapine XR, compared to placebo. Elevations of
these parameters are consistent with the known pharmacological prole of quetiapine in other disorders.
Patients in both quetiapine XR groups experienced
an increase in mean weight, and a higher percentage
of patients reported weight gain o7 % during the
study, compared to placebo-treated patients. The
mean change in body weight in this study (0.61.1 kg)
is similar to that reported in two acute studies of quetiapine XR in patients with schizophrenia (Ganesan
et al. 2008 ; Kahn et al. 2007). Longer-term studies are
needed to evaluate these metabolic eects during
maintenance treatment for GAD. Weight increases
have also been observed with SSRIs and with other
antidepressants (Fava, 2000). Paroxetine has been
shown to cause weight gain (Marks et al. 2008). In the
present study, mean increase in weight with paroxetine was similar to that seen with placebo, although
the proportion of patients with weight gain o7 % was
greater than in the placebo group.
The present study was designed to evaluate quetiapine XR in the acute treatment of GAD and therefore lasted for 10 wk, including 8 wk of active
treatment. The changes in laboratory parameters and
weight in this study are consistent with observations
in short-term monotherapy studies from the quetiapine XR clinical programme in patients with major
depressive disorder (Cutler et al. 2009 ; Weisler et al.
2009). Publication of results from a completed maintenance study investigating quetiapine XR in patients
with GAD is awaited.
Paroxetine was administered at a dose of 20 mg in
this study ; however, higher doses (up to 60 mg) have
been used in clinical trials of GAD. Nonetheless, in one
xed-dose study, 40 mg paroxetine did not show signicantly greater improvement than 20 mg for the
treatment of GAD (Rickels et al. 2003). The 20-mg dose
utilized in our study is in accordance with the paroxetine prescribing information. Although it is usually
recommended to dose paroxetine in the morning, this
agent was administered in the evening throughout the
study to maintain blinding.
Lower daily doses were possible in patients with
GAD compared the recommended dose range for
patients with schizophrenia (400800 mg) and a oncedaily, evening dosing regimen could be utilized with
the XR formulation of quetiapine.
Due to the exclusion of patients with comorbid depression, which is standard procedure in clinical trials

11

of anxiety disorders, the patient population in our

study may not be truly representative of patients with
GAD in clinical practice. Notably, quetiapine is eective in, and is approved for, the treatment of bipolar
depression (Calabrese et al. 2005 ; Thase et al. 2006) and
quetiapine XR has proven ecacy in treating depressive symptoms (Bauer et al. 2009 ; Cutler et al.
2009 ; Weisler et al. 2009). A specic measure of disability was not utilized in the present study as such
scales are often not sensitive to acute changes. It was
therefore not possible to formally assess the baseline
level of impairment or changes in functioning that
may have occurred following treatment. However,
quetiapine XR monotherapy was signicantly more
eective in maintaining improvements in Sheehan
Disability Scale scores compared to placebo in a timeto-event (f52 wk) multicentre, randomized-withdrawal, double-blind, long-term study (Katzman et al.
2008a) ; full publication of these results is awaited.
Although the precise mechanism of action is
unknown, the anxiolytic ecacy demonstrated by
quetiapine may be due to its actions on the dopamine,
serotonin, and norepinephrine neurotransmitter systems, or a combination of these eects. Both quetiapine
and norquetiapine (active human metabolite) have
moderate to high anity for dopamine D2 and serotonin 5-HT2A receptors and norquetiapine is a potent
inhibitor of the norepinephrine transporter (Goldstein
et al. 2008 ; Jensen et al. 2008). As most drugs that are
eective in the treatment of anxiety disorders enhance
serotonergic and/or noradrenergic neurotransmission, it may be assumed that the anxiolytic eects of
quetiapine are achieved via antagonism at serotonin
5-HT2A receptors by norquetiapine and quetiapine,
and/or inhibition of norepinephrine reuptake by norquetiapine. Additionally, preclinical studies have
shown that antagonism at D2 receptors plays a role in
the anxiolytic eect of quetiapine in rodents (Maciag
et al. 2007).
GAD is a serious illness and many patients do not
recover following adequate treatment with currently available pharmacotherapies. Moreover, many
(>40 %) patients with GAD experience residual anxiety symptoms 612 yr after diagnosis (Tyrer &
Baldwin, 2006 ; Yonkers et al. 2000). In general, treatment guidelines do not recommend the use of conventional antipsychotics for patients with GAD due to
the associated risk of EPS ; however, atypical antipsychotics may have utility in this patient population
(Bandelow et al. 2008 ; IPAP, 2008). Nonetheless, when
deciding upon a particular pharmacotherapy, it is
important that any benets associated with treatment
are carefully measured against potential risks, taking

12

B. Bandelow et al.

Table 3. Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) (with an incidence of >5 % in any group) during the 8-wk
randomized treatment period and during the drug-discontinuation phase, AEs of special interest (sexual dysfunction and
extrapyramidal symptoms) occurring during the 8-wk randomized treatment period, and changes in clinical laboratory
parameters and body weight from baseline end of treatment (safety population)
Quetiapine XR
50 mg
(n=220)

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
(n=218)

Paroxetine
20 mg
(n=215)

Placebo
(n=217)

Randomized treatment period, MedDRA preferred term, n ( %)

Dry mouth
Somnolencea
Fatigue
Dizziness
Headache
Sedation
Nausea
Constipation
Diarrhoea
Nasopharyngitis
Insomnia

35 (15.9)
48 (21.8)
33 (15.0)
26 (11.8)
36 (16.4)
14 (6.4)
17 (7.7)
10 (4.5)
7 (3.2)
7 (3.2)
7 (3.2)

56 (25.7)
55 (25.2)
36 (16.5)
34 (15.6)
27 (12.4)
18 (8.3)
14 (6.4)
13 (6.0)
8 (3.7)
5 (2.3)
2 (0.9)

21 (9.8)
24 (11.2)
20 (9.3)
29 (13.5)
37 (17.2)
5 (2.3)
44 (20.5)
6 (2.8)
12 (5.6)
13 (6.0)
20 (9.3)

13 (6.0)
10 (4.6)
8 (3.7)
13 (6.0)
39 (18.0)
1 (0.5)
16 (7.4)
3 (1.4)
10 (4.6)
8 (3.7)
9 (4.1)

Drug-discontinuation phase, MedDRA preferred term, n ( %)

Insomnia
Nausea
Anxiety
Dizziness

10 (4.5)
8 (3.6)
3 (1.4)
7 (3.2)

17 (7.8)
12 (5.5)
3 (1.4)
3 (1.4)

9 (4.2)
9 (4.2)
11 (5.1)
22 (10.2)

5 (2.3)
4 (1.8)
1 (0.5)
3 (1.4)

AEs of special interest, n ( %)

Sexual dysfunctionb
Extrapyramidal symptomsc

2 (0.9)
15 (6.8)

4 (1.8)
11 (5.0)

16 (7.4)
18 (8.4)

5 (2.3)
4 (1.8)

93.6 (11.1)
x0.9 (16.6)
2 (1.2)

94.3 (13.3)
0.9 (12.7)
1 (0.6)

93.3 (12.4)
1.0 (12.2)
3 (1.9)

94.6 (11.7)
0.7 (11.4)
3 (1.8)

Total cholesterol (mg/dl)d

Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Patients with fasting total cholesterol
o240 mg/dl at end of treatment, n ( %)

200.6 (43.6)
x0.4 (27.1)
9 (7.6)

201.9 (46.4)
1.1 (31.7)
11 (8.5)

202.7 (44.2)
0.9 (26.9)
14 (11.4)

199.3 (48.1)
0.8 (27.1)
7 (5.3)

LDL-cholesterol (mg/dl)d
Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Patients with fasting LDL-cholesterol
o160 mg/dl at end of treatment, n ( %)

118.0 (37.0)
0.3 (24.6)
7 (5.6)

120.0 (40.9)
x0.7 (26.1)
9 (6.7)

121.4 (38.7)
1.1 (22.4)
14 (10.6)

116.9 (39.2)
1.6 (24.1)
8 (5.8)

HDL-cholesterol (mg/dl)d
Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Patients with fasting HDL-cholesterol
f40 mg/dl at end of treatment, n ( %)

58.2 (17.2)
x0.3 (9.6)
6 (4.7)

58.0 (15.7)
x2.0 (9.4)
8 (5.9)

57.8 (17.2)
x0.1 (9.7)
3 (2.2)

57.7 (17.5)
0.7 (8.6)
12 (8.6)

Triglycerides (mg/dl)d
Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Patients with fasting triglycerides
o200 mg/dl at end of treatment, n ( %)

123.8 (74.0)
x3.0 (56.8)
7 (5.5)

120.6 (71.3)
19.7 (67.5)
18 (13.6)

118.1 (64.7)
x0.2 (54.1)
8 (5.8)

127.4 (86.2)
x8.3 (64.1)
6 (4.3)

Laboratory parameters
Glucose (mg/dl)d
Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Patients with fasting glucose
o126 mg/dL at end of treatment, n ( %)

Quetiapine XR for GAD

13

Table 3 (cont.)
Quetiapine XR
50 mg
(n=220)
Prolactin (ng/ml)e
Mean (S.D.) baseline
Mean (S.D.) change
Weight (kg), mean (S.D.) change
Patients with a o7 % increase in body
weight at end of treatment, n ( %)

10.0 (8.8)
x0.4 (5.9)
0.6 (2.3)
10 (4.6)

Quetiapine XR
150 mg
(n=218)

Paroxetine
20 mg
(n=215)

10.1 (9.9)
0.0 (10.7)
1.1 (2.2)
15 (6.9)

9.5 (5.8)
2.3 (17.1)
0.0 (2.2)
10 (4.7)

Placebo
(n=217)

10.7 (9.8)
x1.0 (10. 7)
0.1 (2.8)
5 (2.3)

MedDRA, Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities ; LDL, low-density lipoprotein ; HDL, high-density lipoprotein.
a
The median times to rst onset of somnolence were 2.0, 4.5, and 4.0 d for the quetiapine XR, paroxetine, and placebo groups,
respectively.
b
MedDRA preferred terms : anorgasmia, ejaculation disorder, libido decreased, loss of libido, orgasm abnormal, sexual
dysfunction, spontaneous penile erection ; three of these AEs were severe in intensity [150 mg quetiapine XR, n=1 (loss of libido) ;
paroxetine, n=2 (one each of loss of libido and sexual dysfunction)].
c
MedDRA preferred terms : akathisia, restlessness, tremor, extrapyramidal disorder, bradykinesia, dyskinesia, hypertonia,
muscle rigidity, psychomotor hyperactivity ; two of these AEs were severe in intensity, tremor in the 150 mg quetiapine XR
group (n=1) and dyskinesia in the paroxetine group (n=1).
d
Fasting documented by patient report of at least 8 h since last meal before blood draw for both baseline and post-baseline
sampling.
e
Normal prolactin range (double antibody radioimmunoassay) : 220 ng/ml (males) ; 229 ng/ml (females).

into account the complete tolerability prole for a

given agent as well as individual patient factors. As the
present study is short term, additional relapse prevention studies are necessary to establish if the benets of quetiapine XR in GAD are maintained over the
longer term and to assess the tolerability prole in this
setting.
In summary, results reported here show that
quetiapine XR once-daily monotherapy is an eective
and generally well-tolerated treatment for patients
with GAD, with symptom improvement seen as early
as day 4, and a positive inuence on sleep disturbances. Thus, quetiapine XR may oer an alternative treatment option for patients with anxiety
symptoms.

Appendix : Investigators involved in the study

Argentina : Ricardo Corral (Buenos Aires), Carlos
Finkelsztein (Buenos Aires), Christian Lupo (Rosario),
Miguel Marquez (Buenos Aires), Pedro Gargolo
(Buenos Aires), Julio Herrera (Mendoza), Roxana
Galeno (Mendoza), Gerardo Garcia Bonetto
(Cordoba), Alberto Bertoldi (Buenos Aires), Carlos
Morra (Cordoba), Daniel Mosca (Buenos Aires) ;
Bulgaria : Lubomir Jivkov (Soa), Temenuzhka
Mateva (Ruse), Stefan Todorov (Varna), Rinaldo

Shishkov (Varna), Damjan Getev (Kardjali), Ognian

Tanchev (Soa), Emilia Veleva (Soa), Georgi Parchev
(Veliko Tarnova), Nadia Ivanova (Vratza) ; Canada :
Guy Chouinard (Quebec, QC), Richard Bergeron
(Gatineau, QC), Sanjay Siddhartha (Miramichi, NB),
Raymond Matte (Sherbrooke, QC), Angelo Fallu
(Sherbrooke, QC), Serge Lessard (Orleans, ON),
Sunny Johnson (Mississauga, ON), Paul Latimer
(Kelownanm BC), Ranjith Chandrasena (Chatham,
ON), Muhammad Sayeed (Corner Brook, NL), Brian
Ticoll (Markham, ON), Arun Ravindran (Toronto,
ON), Mysore Renuka-Prasad (Saskatoon, SK), Javed
Ali (Sydney, NS), Arthur David Kantor (Toronto, ON),
Eric Giguere (Montreal, QC), Jacques Bradwejn
(Ottawa, ON), Kevin Kjernisted (Vancouver, BC),
Rama Prayaga (Brantford, ON), Anil Joseph,
(Sudbury, ON) ; Czech Republic : Zdenek Solle
(Praha), Erik Herman (Praha), Eva Soukupova (Plzen),
Michaela Klabusayova (Brno), Ilona Divacka (Praha),
Jaroslav Lestina (Praha), Jiri Pisvejc (Litomerice), Jiri
Bilik (Olomouc), Juraj Rektor (Prerov), Jiri Rozkos
(Prostejov) ; Denmark : Jesper Sgaard (Kbenhavn),
Stig Rasmussen (Hillerd), Bjarne Bahr (Kbenhavn),
Bjarne
Nielsen
(Hellerup),
Kirsten
Behnke
(Frederiksberg), Erik Kjrsgaard Nielsen (Haderslev),
rhus) ; Finland : Antti Ahokas
Eivind Knutsen (A
(Helsinki), Anna Savela (Helsinki), Raili Kansanen
(Helsinki), Riitta Jokinen (Turku), Jukka Penttinen

14

B. Bandelow et al.

(Salo), Juhani Aer (Jarvenpaa) ; France : Joel

Gailledreau (Elancourt), Eric Neuman (Le Pecq),
Frederic Chapelle (Toulouse), Christian Gaussares
(Arcahon), Joel Pon (Toulouse), Mocrane Abbar
(Nimes), Pierre Le Goubey (Cherbourg), Paule Khalifa
(Toulouse), Jean Audet (Angouleme), Bertrand
Baranovsky (Rennes), Christophe Dufour (La Valette
du Var) ; Germany : Borwin Bandelow (Gottingen),
Bernd Gestewitz (Bad Saarow), Alexander Schulze
(Berlin), Klaus-Christian Steinwachs (Nurnberg),
Serena Scarel (Unterhaching), Eugen Schlegel (Siegen),
Andrej Pauls (Munchen), Ansgar Frieling (Hamburg),
Wolfgang Mattern (Bochum), Jana Thomsen (Berlin) ;
Mexico :
Sergio
Javier
Villasenor
Bayardo
(Guadalajara), Susana Garca Cruz (Ciudad de
Mexico), Humberto Nicolini (Extremadura), Ricardo
Secin (Colonia Heroes de Padierna), Felipe Ortega
Zarzosa (San Luis Potos), Juan Bautista Corral Garca
(Ciudad de Mexico) ; Norway : Espen Anker (Oslo),
Dag Oulie (Fyllingsdalen), Ole Johan Hyberg
(Brattvag), Helge Istad (Oslo), Erik fjord (Paradis) ;
Romania : Gabriela Marian (Bucharest), Cristian
Marinescu (Arges), Marie Georgescu (Bucharest),
Catalina Tudose (Bucharest), Irina Dan (Bucharest),
Daniela Vulcu (Sibiu) ; Slovakia : Marek Zelman
(Brezno), Eva Palova (Kosice), Vladimr Garaj (Bojnice),
Dagmar Strocholcova (Zilina-Bytcica), Zuzana
Jankova (Liptovsky Mikulas), Livia Vavrusova
(Bratislava) ; South Africa : Lynette Nel (Pretoria), V
Agambaram (Durban), Irma Verster (Bloemfontein),
Donald Wilson (Cape Town), Paul Carey (Cape
Town), Paresh Ramjee (Pretoria), Dana Niehaus (Cape
Town) ; Spain : Jose Ramon Domenech Bisen
(Barcelona), Salvador Ros Montalban (Barcelona),
Antonio Higueras Aranda (Granada), Julio Bobes
lvarez (Madrid),
Garca (Asturias), Tomas Palomo A
Angel Lus Montejo Gonzalez (Salamanca) ; Sweden :
Christer Engstrom (Sundsvall), Per Ekdahl (Malmo),
Goran Johnson (Malmo), Kurt Wahlstedt (Uppsala),
Ingemar Sjodin (Linkoping), Peter Bosson (Lund).
Acknowledgements
This study (Silver : D1448C00011) was supported by
AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals. We thank Dr Kim
Croskery, from Complete Medical Communications
Limited, who provided medical writing support,
funded by AstraZeneca. The author(s) are entirely
responsible for the scientic content of the paper.
Clinical Trials Registry number : NCT00322595.
The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov.
NCT00322595 (http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/
NCT00322595).

Statement of Interest
Borwin Bandelow has received consulting fees and
honoraria within the last 3 years from AstraZeneca,
BristolMyers
Squibb,
Cephalon,
DainipponSumitomo, Glaxo, Janssen, Jazz, Lilly, Lundbeck,
Pzer, Roche, Servier, Solvay, Wyeth and XianJanssen. Guy Chouinard has received consulting fees
and honoraria within the last 3 years from JanssenCilag, Schering Plough, and BioLineRx. Julio Bobes
has received consulting fees and honoraria within
the last 3 years from AstraZeneca, GlaxoSmithKline,
Janssen-Cilag, Lilly, and Pzer. Antti Ahokas has received consulting fees and honoraria from BoehringerIngelheim, GlaxoSmithKline, Lilly, Lundbeck, SanoAventis, Servier, and Wyeth. Ivan Eggens, Hans
Eriksson, and Sherry Liu are employees of AstraZeneca.

References
Adson DE, Kushner MG, Eiben KM, Schulz SC (2004).
Preliminary experience with adjunctive quetiapine in
patients receiving selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors.
Depression and Anxiety 19, 121126.
Allgulander C, Dahl AA, Austin C, Morris PL, et al. (2004).
Ecacy of sertraline in a 12-week trial for generalized
anxiety disorder. American Journal of Psychiatry 161,
16421649.
Arvanitis LA, Miller BG, the Seroquel Trial 13 Study Group
(1997). Multiple xed doses of Seroquel (quetiapine) in
patients with acute exacerbation of schizophrenia : a
comparison with haloperidol and placebo. Biological
Psychiatry 42, 233246.
Ball SG, Kuhn A, Wall D, Shekhar A, et al. (2005). Selective
serotonin reuptake inhibitor treatment for generalized
anxiety disorder : a double-blind, prospective comparison
between paroxetine and sertraline. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry 66, 9499.
Bandelow B, Zohar J, Hollander E, Kasper S, et al. (2008).
World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry
(WFSBP) guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of
anxiety, obsessivecompulsive and post-traumatic stress
disorders First Revision. World Journal of Biological
Psychiatry 9, 248312.
Bauer M, Pretorius HW, Constant EL, Earley WR, et al.
(2009). Extended release quetiapine fumarate as adjunct to
an antidepressant in patients with major depressive
disorder : results of a randomized, placebo-controlled,
double-blind study. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 70,
540549.
Benca RM (2001). Consequences of insomnia and
its therapies. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 62 (Suppl. 10),
3338.
Buysse DJ, Reynolds III CF, Monk TH, Berman SR, et al.
(1989). The Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index : a new

Quetiapine XR for GAD

instrument for psychiatric practice and research. Psychiatry
Research 28, 193213.
Calabrese JR, Keck Jr. PE, Macfadden W, Minkwitz M,
et al. (2005). A randomized, double-blind, placebocontrolled trial of quetiapine in the treatment of bipolar I
or II depression. American Journal of Psychiatry 162,
13511360.
Casey DE (2006). Implications of the CATIE trial on
treatment : extrapyramidal symptoms. CNS Spectrums 11,
2531.
Chouinard G (2004). Issues in the clinical use of
benzodiazepines : potency, withdrawal, and rebound.
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 65 (Suppl. 5), 712.
Cutler AJ, Montgomery SA, Feifel D, Lazarus A, et al.
(2009). Extended release quetiapine fumarate
monotherapy in major depressive disorder : a placebo- and
duloxetine-controlled study. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
70, 526539.
Fava GA, Bernardi M, Tomba E, Rafanelli C (2007). Eects of
gradual discontinuation of selective serotonin reuptake
inhibitors in panic disorder with agoraphobia. International
Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology 10, 835838.
Fava M (2000). Weight gain and antidepressants. Journal of
Clinical Psychiatry 61 (Suppl. 11), 3741.
Galynker I, Khan A, Grebchenko Y, Ten A, et al. (2005).
Low-dose risperidone and quetiapine as monotherapy for
comorbid anxiety and depression. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry 66, 544.
Ganesan S, Agambaram V, Randeree F, Eggens I, et al.
(2008). Switching from other antipsychotics to once-daily
extended release quetiapine fumarate in patients with
schizophrenia. Current Medical Research and Opinion 24,
2132.
Gelenberg AJ, Lydiard RB, Rudolph RL, Aguiar L, et al.
(2000). Ecacy of venlafaxine extended-release capsules
in nondepressed outpatients with generalized anxiety
disorder : a 6-month randomized controlled trial. Journal
of the American Medical Association 283, 30823088.
GlaxoSmithKline (2008). Paroxetine prescribing
information. (http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/
us_paxil.pdf).
Goldstein JM, Nyberg S, Brecher M (2008). Preclinical
mechanisms for the broad spectrum of antipsychotic,
antidepressant and mood stabilizing properties of
Seroquel. European Psychiatry 23 (Suppl. 2), S202.
IPAP (2008). International Psychopharmacology Algorithm
Project. Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) algorithm
(http://www.ipap.org/gad/).
Jensen NH, Rodriguiz RM, Caron MG, Wetsel WC, et al.
(2008). N-Desalkylquetiapine, a potent norepinephrine
reuptake inhibitor and partial 5-HT(1A) agonist, as a
putative mediator of quetiapines antidepressant activity.
Neuropsychopharmacology 33, 23032312.
Judd LL, Kessler RC, Paulus MP, Zeller PV, et al. (1998).
Comorbidity as a fundamental feature of generalized
anxiety disorders : results from the National Comorbidity
Study (NCS). Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica (Suppl. 393),
611.

15

Kahn RS, Schulz SC, Palazov VD, Reyes EB, et al.

(2007). Ecacy and tolerability of once-daily extended
release quetiapine fumarate in acute schizophrenia : a
randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 68, 832842.
Katzman MA, Brawman-Mintzer O, Reyes E, Olausson B,
et al. (2008a). Quetiapine XR : maintenance therapy of
generalised anxiety disorder. Poster presented at the XIV
World Congress of Psychiatry, Prague, Czech Republic,
2025 September.
Katzman MA, Vermani M, Jacobs L, Marcus M, et al.
(2008b). Quetiapine as an adjunctive pharmacotherapy for
the treatment of non-remitting generalized anxiety
disorder : a exible-dose, open-label pilot trial. Journal of
Anxiety Disorders 22, 14801486.
Keller A, McGarvey EL, Clayton AH (2006). Reliability and
construct validity of the Changes in Sexual Functioning
Questionnaire short-form (CSFQ-14). Journal of Sex and
Marital Therapy 32, 4352.
Kott A, Cicchetti D, Markovic O, Spear C (2008). Assessing
the ability of rater training to achieve good-to-excellent
inter-rater reliability on the HAM-A using kappa statistics.
European Psychiatry 23, S214.
Leo RJ (1996). Movement disorders associated with the
serotonin selective reuptake inhibitors. Journal of Clinical
Psychiatry 57, 449454.
Maciag C, Smolka J, McLaughlin J, Hudzik T, et al. (2007).
Anxiolytic eects of quetiapine in rat punished
responding : mechanism of action and the role of D2
antagonism. European Neuropsychopharmacology 17
(Suppl. 4), S399.
Marks DM, Park MH, Ham BJ, Han C, et al. (2008).
Paroxetine : safety and tolerability issues. Expert Opinion on
Drug Safety 7, 783794.
Mendels J, Krajewski TF, Huer V, Taylor RJ, et al. (1986).
Eective short-term treatment of generalized anxiety
disorder with triuoperazine. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
47, 170174.
Michelson D, Fava M, Amsterdam J, Apter J, et al. (2000).
Interruption of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor
treatment. Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. British
Journal of Psychiatry 176, 363368.
Montgomery SA (2006). Pregabalin for the treatment of
generalised anxiety disorder. Expert Opinion on
Pharmacotherapy 7, 21392154.
Ninan PT (2001). Dissolving the burden of generalized
anxiety disorder. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 62 (Suppl.
19), 510.
Nutt D, Argyropoulos S, Hood S, Potokar J (2006).
Generalized anxiety disorder : a comorbid disease.
European Neuropsychopharmacology 16 (Suppl. 2),
S109S118.
Papadimitriou GN, Linkowski P (2005). Sleep disturbance in
anxiety disorders. International Review of Psychiatry 17,
229236.
Pollack MH (2001). Optimizing pharmacotherapy of
generalized anxiety disorder to achieve remission. Journal
of Clinical Psychiatry 62 (Suppl. 19), 2025.

16

B. Bandelow et al.

Pollack MH, Zaninelli R, Goddard A, McCaerty JP, et al.

(2001). Paroxetine in the treatment of generalized anxiety
disorder : results of a placebo-controlled, exible-dosage
trial. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry 62, 350357.
Rickels K, Pollack MH, Feltner DE, Lydiard RB, et al. (2005).
Pregabalin for treatment of generalized anxiety disorder : a
4-week, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial
of pregabalin and alprazolam. Archives of General Psychiatry
62, 10221030.
Rickels K, Weise CC, Feldman H, Fee EA, et al. (1978).
Loxapine in neurotic anxiety : some modiers of treatment
response. Journal of International Medical Research 6,
180185.
Rickels K, Zaninelli R, McCaerty J, Bellew K, et al. (2003).
Paroxetine treatment of generalized anxiety disorder : a
double-blind, placebo-controlled study. American Journal of
Psychiatry 160, 749756.
Rubio G, Lopez-Ibor JJ (2007). Generalized anxiety disorder :
a 40-year follow-up study. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica
115, 372379.
Simon NM, Connor KM, Lebeau RT, Hoge EA, et al.
(2008). Quetiapine augmentation of paroxetine CR
for the treatment of refractory generalized anxiety
disorder : preliminary ndings. Psychopharmacology (Berlin)
197, 675681.

Thase ME, Macfadden W, Weisler RH, Chang W, et al.

(2006). Ecacy of quetiapine monotherapy in bipolar I and
II depression : a double-blind, placebo-controlled study
(the BOLDER II study). Journal of Clinical
Psychopharmacology 26, 600609.
Timdahl K, Carlsson A, Stening G (2007). An analysis of
safety and tolerability data from controlled, comparative
studies of quetiapine in patients with schizophrenia,
focusing on extrapyramidal symptoms. Human
Psychopharmacology 22, 315325.
Tyrer P, Baldwin D (2006). Generalised anxiety disorder.
Lancet 368, 21562166.
Weisler R, Joyce MJ, McGill L, Lazarus A, et al. (2009).
Extended release quetiapine fumarate monotherapy for
major depressive disorder : results of a double-blind,
randomized, placebo controlled study. CNS Spectrums 14,
299313.
Yamamoto J, Kline FM, Burgoyne RW (1973). The treatment
of severe anxiety in outpatients : a controlled study
comparing chlordiazepoxide and chlorpromazine.
Psychosomatics 14, 4651.
Yonkers KA, Dyck IR, Warshaw M, Keller MB (2000).
Factors predicting the clinical course of generalised
anxiety disorder. British Journal of Psychiatry 176,
544549.