Lavender oil preparation Silexan is effective in mild-to-moderate major depression: a randomized, placebo- and reference-controlled trial

Anxiety and depressive disorders have overlapping symptoms and share common neurobiological pathways. Antidepressant drugs have been demonstrated to be efficacious in anxiety as well. Vice versa, it may also be promising to investigate the efficacy of anxiolytic drugs such as silexan in major depressive disorder (MDD). Patients with a mild or moderate, single or recurrent episode of MDD and a total score of 19-34 points on the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) were randomized to receive 1 × 80 mg/d silexan, 1 × 50 mg/d sertraline, or placebo double-blind, double-dummy for 56 days. The primary outcome measure was the MADRS total score change between baseline and treatment end. Treatment groups were compared using a treatment policy estimand. 498 subjects (silexan 170, sertraline 171, placebo 157) were treated and analyzed. After 8 weeks, silexan and sertraline were superior to placebo for MADRS total score reduction, with absolute differences to placebo of 2.17 (95% confidence interval: 0.58; 3.76) points and 2.59 (1.02; 4.17) points, respectively (p < 0.01). Moreover, silexan was superior to placebo for alleviation of functional impairment according to the Sheehan Disability Scale with a difference of 2.40 (1.04; 3.76) points (p < 0.001). Both treatments were well tolerated; eructation was the most frequent adverse effect of silexan. The study confirms the antidepressant efficacy of silexan in mild or moderate MDD, including significant improvements in the subjects' functional capacity. The results for sertraline confirm the assay sensitivity of the trial. Both drugs were well tolerated.Trial registrationEudraCT2020-000688-22 first entered on 12/08/2020.

Baseline symptom severity and efficacy of Silexan in patients with anxiety disorders: A symptom-based, patient-level analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials

The influence of baseline severity on the efficacy of Silexan, a proprietary essential oil from Lavandula angustifolia, in anxiety disorders has not been investigated in a pooled dataset. We report on an individual patient data analysis of all five double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials with Silexan in anxiety disorders. Eligible participants received Silexan 80 mg/d or placebo for 10 weeks. Analyses were based on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), its psychic and somatic anxiety subscores, and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale. To correlate baseline severity with outcome, patients were segregated into mild, moderate, and severe cases. Altogether 1,172 patients (Silexan, n = 587; placebo, n = 585) were analyzed. For the HAMA total score, we found a significant association between the score at baseline and the treatment effect of Silexan versus placebo at week 10 (p < 0.001). HAMA items from the somatic domain scored lower at baseline and showed less improvement than items from the psychic domain, particularly in patients with mild or moderate baseline symptoms. For CGI item 2 (global improvement), significant efficacy favoring Silexan were observed in mild, moderate, and severe baseline symptom severity. Although significant improvements were found for all subsets, the more severe the initial symptoms, the greater the treatment effects documented by the HAMA. Overall this analysis confirms that Silexan is an effective treatment option in early or mild stages of anxiety disorder. Given its favorable safety profile, Silexan can thus fill a therapeutic gap in the treatment of (subsyndromal) anxiety disorders.

Efficacy of Silexan in patients with anxiety disorders: a meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials

INTRODUCTION

We report on a meta-analysis of Silexan, a proprietary active substance produced from Lavandula angustifolia, in subthreshold anxiety, mixed anxiety and depressive disorder (MADD), and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD).

METHODS

The present analyses are based on all currently completed 5 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating Silexan in adult out-patients who received Silexan 1 × 80 mg/day or placebo for ten weeks according to random assignment (n = 1213). Efficacy was assessed based on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), several anxiety self-rating scales, the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) scale, and the Short Form-36 (SF-36) health status questionnaire.

RESULTS

After ten weeks' treatment, Silexan was significantly superior to placebo in reducing the HAMA total score (including the psychic and somatic anxiety sub-scores) and self-rated anxiety. Based on a ≥ 50% HAMA total score reduction, the responder rate ratio was 1.34 favoring Silexan, and the rate ratio of subjects much or very much improved according to the CGI was 1.51. Silexan was also significantly superior in improving the physical and mental health summary scores of the SF-36. There were no significant between-group differences concerning the occurrence of adverse events (AEs), serious AEs, and premature withdrawal due to AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis demonstrates that Silexan exerts significant anxiolytic effects in subthreshold anxiety, GAD and MADD that were consistently reflected in investigator ratings and patient-reported outcomes, including improvement of health-related life-quality, while showing favorable tolerability and safety.

No Abuse Potential of Silexan in Healthy Recreational Drug Users: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Silexan is a lavender essential oil with established anxiolytic and calming efficacy. Here we asked whether there is a potential for abuse in human patients.

METHODS

We carried out a phase I abuse liability single-center, double-blind, 5-way crossover study in healthy users of recreational central nervous system depressants. They received single oral doses of 80 mg (therapeutic dose) and 640 mg Silexan, 2 mg and 4 mg lorazepam (active control) and placebo in randomized order, with 4- to 14-day washout periods between treatments. Pharmacodynamic measures included validated visual analogue scales assessing positive, negative, and sedative drug effects and balance of effects; a short form of the Addiction Research Center Inventory; and a drug similarity assessment. The primary outcome measure was the individual maximum value on the drug liking visual analogue scale during 24 hours post-dose.

RESULTS

Forty participants were randomized and 34 were evaluable for pharmacodynamic outcomes. In intraindividual head-to-head comparisons of the drug liking visual analogue scale maximum value, both doses of Silexan were rated similar to placebo whereas differences were observed between Silexan and lorazepam and between placebo and lorazepam (P < .001). These data were supported by all secondary measures of positive drug effects and of balance of effects. Differences between placebo and both doses of Silexan were always negligible in magnitude. Moreover, Silexan showed no sedative effects and was not perceived to be similar to commonly used drugs that participants had used in the past.

CONCLUSIONS

Silexan did not exhibit any abuse potential in a standard abuse potential detection screen study and is unlikely to be recreationally abused.

Beneficial effects of Silexan on sleep are mediated by its anxiolytic effect

Disturbed sleep is among the most prevalent hyperarousal symptoms in anxiety disorders. Most drugs recommended for anxiety and insomnia have a sedating effect which is related to their beneficial effect on disturbed sleep. Silexan is a proprietary essential oil from Lavandula angustifolia. This drug has significant anxiolytic and sleep improving properties. Interestingly, these effects are not associated with sedation. Here we asked whether the positive effects on sleep are due to primary pharmacodynamic or secondary, disease related effects. We used the data from a double-blind, randomized study in which 212 patients were analyzed for efficacy after ten weeks' treatment with 80 mg/day Silexan or placebo. Anxiety and disturbed sleep were assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI), respectively. Regression-based mediation analysis was employed to estimate direct treatment effects and indirect effects mediated by anxiety control separately for each study group. Sobel's test was used to investigate the extent to which the mediator (HAMA change) contributes to the total effect of the independent variable (treatment) on the dependent variable (PSQI change). Compared to placebo, Silexan significantly reduced the total scores of the HAMA (p < 0.001) and of the PSQI (p = 0.002) after ten weeks, with clinically meaningful treatment group differences that were observed already after two and six weeks for HAMA and PSQI, respectively. Silexan had a statistically meaningful indirect effect on sleep (mediated by the effect on anxiety; p < 0.001) but no appreciable direct effect (p = 0.958). The ratio between the indirect and the total effect was determined to be 0.984, i. e., 98.4% of the total effect of Silexan on disturbed sleep were explained by the effect of Silexan on the symptoms of anxiety whereas 1.6% were attributable to a direct effect. The results indicate that Silexan exerts a secondary sleep improving effect almost exclusively through its anxiolytic action rather than by sedation. Findings are consistent with the drug's assumed mechanism of action.

Efficacy of Silexan in subthreshold anxiety: meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled trials

Subthreshold psychiatric disorders do not fully meet the diagnostic criteria of syndromal disorders but may be associated with comparable disability. To investigate the anxiolytic effect of Silexan, an active substance from lavender oil for oral administration, in patients with subthreshold anxiety, a meta-analysis that included all published trials with Silexan in this indication was performed. Three randomised, placebo-controlled trials in subthreshold anxiety disorders (anxiety disorder not otherwise specified, restlessness and agitation, mixed anxiety and depressive disorder) were included. Eligible participants with a baseline Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA) total score ≥ 18 points received 1 × 80 mg/day Silexan or placebo for 10 weeks. Outcomes included the HAMA, the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index, the Zung Self-rating Anxiety Scale, the Clinical Global Impressions questionnaire and the SF-36 health status inventory. Data were analysed using meta-analysis based on pooled raw data of individual patients (random effects models). A total of 697 patients were assessed for efficacy. Silexan was superior to placebo in reducing the HAMA total score during 10 weeks' treatment [mean value difference, 95% confidence interval: 3.83 (1.28; 6.37) points]. Superiority was comparably pronounced for psychic and somatic anxiety as well as for observer- and self-rated anxiety. Silexan had a beneficial effect on sleep (secondary to the anxiolytic effect) without causing sedation and improved the patients' health-related quality of life. Adverse event incidence in both treatment groups was comparable [risk ratio: 1.06 (0.85; 1.33)]. Silexan has a significant and clinically meaningful anxiolytic effect in subthreshold anxiety. The results cannot be generalised to other lavender oil products.

Silexan does not cause withdrawal symptoms even when abruptly discontinued

OBJECTIVE

Subsequent to a randomised, double-blind, double dummy clinical trial assessing the efficacy of silexan compared to placebo and paroxetine in patients suffering from generalised anxiety disorder (GAD), a 1week follow-up phase was added in order to assess possible withdrawal symptoms of silexan after abrupt discontinuation.

METHODS

Participants received silexan 80 mg/d, silexan 160 mg/d, paroxetine 20 mg/d, or placebo at a ratio of 1:1:1:1. Study medication was discontinued after the 10 week active treatment phase of the original trial. Whereas paroxetine was tapered as indicated, silexan administration was discontinued abruptly. Assessment of possible withdrawal effects was done using the Physician Withdrawal Checklist questionnaire (PWC-20).

RESULTS

During the 1 week down-titration phase, mean total PWC-20 scores had reduced by 0.19 in placebo, 0.23 in silexan 80, 0.65 in silexan 160, and 0.51 in paroxetine. The median change in all four groups was 0.00. In none of the treatment groups withdrawal effects occurred after discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Values assessed for the silexan groups indicate the absence of a dependency potential of this preparation.

Efficacy of Silexan in mixed anxiety-depression--A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Mixed anxiety and depressive disorder (MADD; ICD-10 F41.2) is a condition characterized by subsyndromal symptoms of anxiety and depression, neither of which are clearly predominant. Silexan has been demonstrated to be efficacious in subsyndromal and syndromal anxiety disorders and co-morbid depressive symptoms. In this study 318 adult out-patients with MADD according to ICD-10 criteria, a total score ≥18 points on the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAMA), and at least moderately severe anxious and depressed mood were randomized and received 1×80mg Silexan or placebo in double-blind fashion for a scheduled period of 70 days. Primary outcome measures were the HAMA and Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score changes between baseline and treatment end. The HAMA total score decreased by 10.8±9.6 points for Silexan and by 8.4±8.9 points for placebo (treatment group difference: p<0.01, one-sided; ANCOVA with factors for treatment and centre and the baseline value as covariate), and total score decreases of 9.2±9.9 and 6.1±7.6 points, respectively, were observed for the MADRS (p<0.001). Compared to placebo, the patients treated with Silexan had a better over-all clinical outcome and showed more pronounced improvements of impaired daily living skills and health related quality of life. Eructation was the only adverse event with a substantially higher incidence under Silexan. The study thus demonstrates that Silexan is efficacious and safe in the treatment of MADD.

SKT Short Cognitive Performance Test and Activities of Daily Living in Dementia

Using data from two randomized, placebo-controlled trials involving 806 outpatients, we performed linear regression analyses to evaluate how cognitive abilities in patients with dementia assessed by the SKT (Syndrom-Kurztest – Short Cognitive Performance Test) correlate with activities of daily living rated by means of the Activities of Daily Living International Scale (ADL-IS). There were significant correlations between SKT total score and ADL-IS total mean score at baseline (r = 0.52, p < .001) as well as between change in SKT total score and change in ADL-IS total mean score during the 24-week treatment period (r = 0.48, p < .001). Significant correlations with ADL-IS total mean scores were also found for both memory and attention/concentration subscores of the SKT.

Efficacy and safety of silexan, a new, orally administered lavender oil preparation, in subthreshold anxiety disorder - evidence from clinical trials

We review the data on the efficacy and tolerability of silexan, a novel preparation from lavender oil for oral use, in the treatment of anxiety disorders and related condition with particular attention to subthreshold generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Three randomized, double-blind clinical trials were identified which investigated the efficacy of silexan in subsynromal anxiety disorder (vs. placebo; 10 weeks' treatment), in GAD (vs. lorazepam; 6 weeks), and in restlessness and agitation (vs. placebo; 10 weeks) according to DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria. All trials assessed the participants' anxiety levels using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA). Across all trials 280 patients were exposed to silexan 80 mg/day, 37 were treated with lorazepam 0.5 mg/day and 192 received placebo. Average within group HAMA total scores at baseline ranged between 24.7 and 27.1 points. Patients treated with silexan showed average HAMA total score decreases by between 10.4 ± 7.1 and 12.0 ± 7.2 points at week 6 and by between 11.8 ± 7.7 and 16.0 ± 8.3 points at week 10. In GAD silexan and lorazepam showed comparable HAMA total score reductions (90% CI for mean value difference: -2.3; 2.8 points).

Efficacy and safety of silexan, a new, orally administered lavender oil preparation, in subthreshold anxiety disorder

A number of studies has been performed recently on the efficacy and tolerability of silexan, a novel preparation from lavender oil for oral use, in the treatment of anxiety disorders and related conditions with particular attention to subthreshold generalized anxiety disorder (GAD). Three randomized, double-blind clinical trials were identified which investigated the efficacy of silexan in subsynromal anxiety disorder (vs. placebo; 10 weeks’ treatment), in GAD (vs. lorazepam; 6 weeks), and in restlessness and agitation (vs. placebo; 10 weeks) according to DSM-IV and ICD-10 criteria. One open-label pilot study assessed the potential of the medicinal product in neurasthenia, posttraumatic stress disorder and somatization disorder (6 weeks). All trials assessed the participants’ anxiety levels using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAMA) or the State Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI) as well as measures of co-morbidity and clinical global impressions. Across all trials 280 patients were exposed to silexan 80 mg/day, 37 were treated with lorazepam 0.5 mg/day and 192 received placebo. Average within group HAMA total scores at baseline ranged between 24.7 and 27.1 points. Patients treated with silexan showed average HAMA total score decreases by between 10.4 ± 7.1 and 12.0 ± 7.2 points at week 6 and by between 11.8 ± 7.7 and 16.0 ± 8.3 points at week 10. In subthreshold GAD silexan was significantly superior to placebo, with a mean value difference of at least 4 points (lower bound of 95% confidence interval (CI)) after 10 weeks. In GAD silexan and lorazepam showed comparable HAMA total score reductions (90% CI for mean value difference: -2.3; 2.8 points). The decrease of anxiety levels was accompanied by a reduction of restlessness and co-morbidity, and by improvements in general well-being. The anxiolytic effect of silexan is superior to placebo and comparable to lorazepam in subthreshold and threshold GAD, respectively. The medicinal product also improved associated symptoms like restlessness, disturbed sleep and somatic complaints, and had a beneficial influence on general well-being and quality of life. Silexan may offer interesting perspectives particularly in the treatment of subthreshold GAD.

A multi-center, double-blind, randomised study of the Lavender oil preparation Silexan in comparison to Lorazepam for generalized anxiety disorder

Generalized and persistent anxiety, accompanied by nervousness and other symptoms (Generalised Anxiety Disorder, GAD) is frequent in the general population and leads to benzodiazepine usage. Unfortunately, these substances induce sedation and have a high potential for drug abuse, and there is thus a need for alternatives. As the anxiolytic properties of lavender have already been demonstrated in pharmacological studies and small-scale clinical trials, it was postulated that lavender has a positive effect in GAD. A controlled clinical study was then performed to evaluate the efficacy of silexan, a new oral lavender oil capsule preparation, versus a benzodiazepine. In this study, the efficacy of a 6-week-intake of silexan compared to lorazepam was investigated in adults with GAD. The primary target variable was the change in the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A-total score) as an objective measurement of the severity of anxiety between baseline and week 6. The results suggest that silexan effectively ameliorates generalized anxiety comparable to a common benzodiazepine (lorazepam). The mean of the HAM-A-total score decreased clearly and to a similar extent in both groups (by 11.3+/-6.7 points (45%) in the silexan group and by 11.6+/-6.6 points (46%) in the lorazepam group, from 25+/-4 points at baseline in both groups). During the active treatment period, the two HAM-A subscores "somatic anxiety" (HAM-A subscore I) and "psychic anxiety" (HAM-A subscore II) also decreased clearly and to a similar extent in both groups. The changes in other subscores measured during the study, such as the SAS (Self-rating Anxiety Scale), PSWQ-PW (Penn State Worry Questionnaire), SF 36 Health survey Questionnaire and Clinical Global Impressions of severity of disorder (CGI item 1, CGI item 2, CGI item 3), and the results of the sleep diary demonstrated comparable positive effects of the two compounds. In conclusion, our results demonstrate that silexan is as effective as lorazepam in adults with GAD. The safety of silexan was also demonstrated. Since lavender oil showed no sedative effects in our study and has no potential for drug abuse, silexan appears to be an effective and well tolerated alternative to benzodiazepines for amelioration of generalised anxiety.

Efficacy and safety of a combination of sabal and urtica extract in lower urinary tract symptoms. A randomized, double-blind study versus tamsulosin

The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, multicenter clinical trial was to investigate the efficacy and safety of PRO 160/120 (Prostagutt forte), a fixed combination preparation of 160 mg Sabal fruit extract WS 1473 and 120 mg Urtica root extract WS 1031 per capsule, in comparison to the alpha1-adrenoceptor antagonist tamsulosin (CAS 106463-17-6) in lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH). 140 elderly out-patients suffering from LUTS caused by BPH, with an initial score > or = 13 points in the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS), received 2 x 1 capsule/d PRO 160/120 or 1 x 0.4 mg/d tamsulosin and were treated for 60 weeks with interim visits at weeks 8, 16, 24, 36, and 48. The primary outcome measure for efficacy was the change in I-PSS total score, the percentage of patients with an I-PSS score < or = 7 points at endpoint ('responders') was analyzed as well. During 60 weeks of randomized treatment the I-PSS total score was reduced by a median of 9 points in both groups. In total, 32.4 % of the patients in the PRO 160/120 group and 27.9% in the tamsulosin group were responders (test for non-inferiority of PRO 160/120: p = 0.034; non-inferiority margin 10%). Both drugs were well tolerated, with one adverse event in 1514 treatment days for PRO 160/120 and one event in 1164 days for tamsulosin. The study supports non-inferiority of PRO 160/120 in comparison to tamsulosin in the treatment of LUTS caused by BPH.

Long-term efficacy and safety of a combination of sabal and urtica extract for lower urinary tract symptoms—a placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter trial

The efficacy and tolerability of a fixed combination of 160 mg sabal fruit extract WS 1473 and 120 mg urtica root extract WS 1031 per capsule (PRO 160/120) was investigated in elderly, male patients suffering from lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS) caused by benign prostatic hyperplasia in a prospective multicenter trial. A total of 257 patients (129 and 128, respectively) were randomized to treatment with PRO 160/120 or placebo (127 and 126 were evaluable for efficacy). Following a single-blind placebo run-in phase of 2 weeks, the patients received 2 x 1 capsule/day of the study medication under double-blind conditions over a period of 24 weeks. Double-blind treatment was followed by an open control period of 24 weeks during which all patients were administered PRO 160/120. Outcome measures for treatment efficacy included the assessment of the patients' LUTS by means of the I-PSS self-rating questionnaire and a quality of life index as well as uroflow and sonographic parameters. Using the International Prostate Symptom Score (I-PSS), patients treated with PRO 160/120 exhibited a substantially higher total score reduction after 24 weeks of double-blind treatment than patients of the placebo group (6 points vs 4 points; P=0.003, one tailed) with a tendency in the same direction after 16 weeks. This applied to obstructive as well as to irritative symptoms, and to patients with moderate or severe symptoms at baseline. Patients randomized to placebo showed a marked improvement in LUTS (as measured by the I-PSS) after being switched to PRO 160/120 during the control period (P=0.01, one tailed, in comparison to those who had been treated with PRO 160/120 in the double-blind phase). The tolerability of PRO 160/120 was comparable to the placebo. In conclusion, PRO 160/120 was clearly superior to the placebo for the amelioration of LUTS as measured by the I-PSS. PRO 160/120 is advantageous in obstructive and irritative urinary symptoms and in patients with moderate and severe symptoms. The tolerability of the herbal extract was excellent.

Efficacy, safety, and acceptance of beclomethasone dipropionate administered via a new dry powder Inhaler or a standard CFC metered-dose inhaler in asthma patients

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

The mechanical aerosol generator, MAGhaler, is a new chlorofluorocarbon-free inhalation device. The objective of this trial was to show equivalent efficacy and safety of beclomethasone dipropionate (BDP) delivered via the MAGhaler and the metered-dose inhaler (MDI) in patients with mild to moderate bronchial asthma. Moreover, user-friendliness and acceptance of the two devices were compared.

METHODS

This was a double-blind, reference-controlled, 12-week trial in 171 patients with asthma receiving BDP (1,000 microg/day) delivered via either the MAGhaler or the conventional MDI. Respiratory function parameters, clinical symptoms, concomitant intake of salbutamol or fenoterol, adverse events (AEs), laboratory values, and concomitant medications and diseases were recorded. The primary efficacy parameter was mean forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), measured after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of therapy.

RESULTS

The equivalence of the two devices was confirmed (p = 0.003) on the basis of the ratios of the mean FEV1 in weeks 4 to 12. Mean (+/- SD) FEV1 (MAGhaler was 2.24 +/- 0.60 l (baseline), 2.61 +/- 0.90 litres (week 4), and 2.62 +/- 0.87 litres (weeks 4-12). Mean FEV1 (MDI) was 2.28 +/- 0.59 litres (baseline), 2.53 +/- 0.82 litres (week 4), and 2.56 +/- 0.77 litres (weeks 4-12). In total, 33 AEs occurred in 26 (30.2%) patients (MAGhaler) and 51 AEs in 36 (42.4%) patients (MDI). Most of the AEs were of mild or moderate intensity. The relationship to treatment could not be excluded for 11 AEs in 11 patients (MAGhaler) and 23 AEs in 18 patients (MDI). Three serious AEs, all unrelated to treatment, occurred in 3 patients (MAGhaler: 2, MDI: 1). There were no clinically relevant changes in other safety parameters. Most patients either preferred the MAGhaler or rated the two devices as equally acceptable.

CONCLUSION

The new MAGhaler was equivalent to the standard MDI in terms of the safety and efficacy of BDP. The improved user-friendliness and acceptance of the MAGhaler over the conventional MDI represent an important advance in the clinical management of bronchial asthma.