MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2019966832 · doi:10.4088/pcc.11m01182

A 52-Week, Double-Blind Evaluation of the Metabolic Effects of Aripiprazole and Lithium in Bipolar I Disorder

2011· article· en· W2019966832 on OpenAlexaff
Roger S. McIntyre, Susan L. McElroy, James M. Eudicone, Robert A. Forbes, Berit X. Carlson, Ross A. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Primary Care Companion For CNS Disorders · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAripiprazoleBipolar disorderLithium (medication)Double blindBipolar I disorderPsychologyMedicineInternal medicinePsychiatrySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Placebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic risk factors, termed metabolic syndrome, which include obesity, diabetes, dyslipidemia, and hypertension, are more common in patients with bipolar disorder than in the general population. Moreover, medications used to treat bipolar disorder carry some risk of worsening metabolic parameters. METHOD: The study was conducted at 46 study centers in the United States, although only 31 study centers enrolled patients in the 40-week extension phase. Patients with acute bipolar I mania, manic or mixed (DSM-IV-TR criteria; Young Mania Rating Scale score ≥ 20), who required hospitalization were randomly assigned to double-blind aripiprazole (15-30 mg/d), lithium (900-1500 mg/d), or placebo for 3 weeks. Patients treated with aripiprazole or lithium continued treatment to week 12, after which they could enter a double-blind 40-week extension phase. Patients were enrolled in the 12-week acute treatment phase between April 2004 and July 2006; the first patient entered extension treatment in October 2004, and the last patient completed treatment in May 2007. Changes in metabolic parameters were compared between patients treated with aripiprazole or lithium for up to 52 weeks using last observation carried forward and analysis of covariance. Analysis stratified by baseline body mass index (BMI) was also conducted. RESULTS: Modest increases in body weight were observed in both groups: +0.97 kg (2.1 lb) for aripiprazole (n = 127) and + 0.74 (1.6 lb) for lithium (n = 136), P = .60. A significant difference in body weight increase was observed only among patients with a BMI < 25: + 2.66 kg (5.9 lb) for aripiprazole (n = 35) and + 0.40 kg (0.9 lb) for lithium (n = 37), P = .02. Mean changes from baseline to week 52 in fasting levels of total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, plasma glucose, triglycerides, or insulin (last observation carried forward) were small in both aripiprazole and lithium treatment groups; no significant differences were observed. Mean laboratory values were within the normal or borderline range for both treatment groups across all BMI categories. CONCLUSION: Comparably modest and similar changes in metabolic parameters were observed in patients with bipolar disorder treated for up to 1 year with either lithium or aripiprazole. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00095511.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.041
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations32
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Primary Care Companion For CNS DisordersSame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207