Extended-release quetiapine fumarate (quetiapine XR) versus risperidone in the treatment of depressive symptoms in patients with schizoaffective disorder or schizophrenia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depressive symptoms are associated with poor outcomes, increased risk of relapse, and high suicide rates in patients with schizophrenia and schizoaffective disorder. This randomized, open-label, parallel-group, flexible-dose study (NCT00640562) assessed the efficacy of quetiapine extended release (XR) versus risperidone on depressive symptoms in this patient population. Noninferiority of quetiapine XR versus risperidone from baseline to week 12 was assessed by least squares mean (LSM) reduction in the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS). Noninferiority was indicated if the difference in CDSS reductions between quetiapine XR and risperidone had a 95% confidence interval (CI) lower limit of more than -2.7. Overall, 216 patients received quetiapine XR (n = 109; 400-800 mg/day) or risperidone (n = 107; 4-6 mg/day). In the per-protocol population, LSM CDSS reductions for quetiapine XR and risperidone were 8.4 and 6.2 points, respectively (95% CI 0.8-3.7). As the lower limit of the 95% CI was more than -2.7 and the LSM reduction for quetiapine XR was 2.2 points higher than that for risperidone, noninferiority of quetiapine XR versus risperidone was demonstrated. Adverse events for quetiapine XR and risperidone were comparable. In this study, quetiapine XR was noninferior to risperidone at reducing depressive symptoms in patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".