Burning pain secondary to clozapine use: a case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The first of the atypical antipsychotics introduced in the 1970s, clozapine remains the most efficacious neuroleptic to this day. However, serious and potentially fatal side effects have necessitated careful regular monitoring among prescribing clinicians. Some adverse effects (e.g. ischaemic bowel) remain under recognized, while newly identified adverse effects continue to be described in the literature. CASE PRESENTATION: In this report, we describe a healthy 43-year old Caucasian male who experienced onset of a full body deep burning pain several months after the onset of treatment with clozapine. The pain worsened over time, ceased with cessation of treatment, and returned soon after the patient was rechallenged. CONCLUSION: We describe an unusual adverse effect from clozapine treatment that has not been described elsewhere to our knowledge. We present the time course of the pain symptom, relationship to dose, associated laboratory results, and ultimately how it was dealt with and how it improved for the benefit of clinicians who may encounter it in the future.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".