Effects of Cariprazine on Cognition in Patients With Bipolar Mania or Mixed States: Post Hoc Analysis From 3 Randomized, Controlled Phase III Studies
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Introduction Cariprazine, a dopamine D3-preferring D3/D2 and serotonin 5-HT1A receptor partial agonist, is approved for the treatment of schizophrenia and for depressive, manic, or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. Previous post hoc analyses have demonstrated that cariprazine was effective versus placebo for improving cognitive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar depression. This post hoc analysis evaluated the effects of cariprazine on cognitive symptoms in patients with acute manic or mixed bipolar episodes. Methods Data from 3 phase II/III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in patients with manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder (NCT00488618, NCT01058096, NCT01058668) were pooled and analyzed. Patients were randomized to placebo or flexibly dosed cariprazine (3-12 mg/d, 3-6 mg/d, or 6-12 mg/d [1 study only]) for 3 weeks of double-blind treatment; all dose groups were combined for the pooled analysis. Cognitive symptoms were assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) Cognitive subscale (sum of PANSS items P2, N5, N7, G10, G11); a score of 15 or greater at baseline indicated the presence of cognitive symptoms. Mean changes from baseline to week 3 in PANSS cognitive subscale/item scores and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score were evaluated in the overall intent-to-treat (ITT) population and in the subgroup of patients with baseline cognitive symptoms. A mixed-effects model for repeated measures (MMRM) was used to impute missing values. Results Of the 1012 patients in the ITT population, 174 (placebo=71; cariprazine=103) had a PANSS Cognitive subscale score of 15 or greater at baseline. At week 3, the cariprazine group demonstrated significantly greater mean improvement than the placebo group on PANSS cognitive subscale scores in both the ITT population (−2.2 vs −1.3; P<.0001) and the subgroup with baseline cognitive symptoms (−4.0 vs −1.9; P=.0002). In patients with baseline cognitive symptoms, improvement was significantly greater for cariprazine- versus placebo-treated patients on YMRS total score (−16.7 vs −8.2; P<.0001) and the individual PANSS cognitive subscale items of conceptual disorganization (−1.1 vs −0.5; P=.0004), difficulty in abstract thinking (−0.8 vs −0.3; P=.0044), stereotyped thinking (−0.3 vs −0.1; P=.0350), and poor attention (−1.1 vs −0.6; P=.0043). Conclusion In patients with manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder, cariprazine versus placebo was effective in improving cognitive symptoms in the overall patient population as well as in patients with baseline cognitive symptoms. In addition, cariprazine versus placebo also demonstrated efficacy in improving manic symptoms in patients with baseline cognitive symptoms. These results suggest that cariprazine may provide benefits for the treatment of cognitive symptoms in patients with bipolar I mania. Funding AbbVie Inc.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».