Investigational drugs for schizophrenia targeting the dopamine receptor: Phase II trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: For over half a century now, the dopamine hypothesis has provided the most widely accepted heuristic model linking pathophysiology and treatment in schizophrenia. Despite dopaminergic drugs being available for six decades, this system continues to represent a key target in schizophrenia drug discovery. The present article reviews the scientific rationale for dopaminergic medications historically and the shift in our thinking since, which is clearly reflected in the investigational drugs detailed. AREAS COVERED: We searched for investigational drugs using the key words 'dopamine,' 'schizophrenia,' and 'Phase II' in American and European clinical trial registers (clinicaltrials.gov; clinicaltrialsregister.eu), published articles using National Library of Medicine's PubMed database, and supplemented results with a manual search of cross-references and conference abstracts. We provide a brief description of drugs targeting dopamine synthesis, release or metabolism, and receptors (agonists/partial agonists/antagonists). EXPERT OPINION: There are prominent shifts in how we presently conceptualize schizophrenia and its treatment. Current efforts are not as much focused on developing better antipsychotics but, instead, on treatments that can improve other symptom domains, in particular cognitive and negative. This new era in the pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia moves us away from the older 'magic bullet' approach toward a strategy fostering polypharmacy and a more individualized approach shaped by the individual's specific symptom profile.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".