MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131426822 · doi:10.1345/aph.1r123

An Analysis of Potentially Prolactin-Related Adverse Events and Abnormal Prolactin Values in Randomized Clinical Trials with Paliperidone Palmitate

2012· article· en· W2131426822 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas R. Einarson, M. Hemels, Isaac Nuamah, Srihari Gopal, Danielle Coppola, David Hough

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Pharmacotherapy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPituitary Gland Disorders and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProlactinAdverse effectPaliperidone PalmitateAsymptomaticInternal medicineClinical trialRandomized controlled trialSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AntipsychoticHormonePsychiatry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Paliperidone palmitate has been associated with serum prolactin elevations in some patients. However, few individuals with elevated prolactin levels (hyperprolactinemia) have symptomatic potentially prolactin-related adverse events (PPR-AEs). OBJECTIVE: To quantify rates of hyperprolactinemia in subjects treated with the newly marketed paliperidone palmitate long-acting injection (PP-LAI) in randomized clinical trials, summarize rates of PPR-AEs in those trials by sex and dose, and determine how many PPR-AEs required treatment. METHODS: Numbers and rates of investigator-reported hyperprolactinemia and PPR-AEs were obtained from the sponsor's clinical trial database and have been included in regulatory filings. Results were tabulated for males, females, and overall, and by dose administered, using descriptive statistics. Those requiring treatment were described as well. RESULTS: There were 3173 subjects (61.4% males) exposed to PP-LAI in 10 clinical trials; 2831 (89.2%) patients had recorded prolactin levels, including 1759 males (90.3% of exposed males) and 1072 females (87.5% of exposed females). Overall, at any time, prolactin levels were elevated for 38.8% of the subjects (39.5% for males and 37.7% for females; p = 0.354 between sexes). However, there was no significant correlation between monthly dose and proportion of subjects with elevated prolactin levels (p = 0.109). There were 115 PPR-AEs in 107 patients (3.4%); 51 (44.3% of PPR-AEs) cases represented asymptomatic hyperprolactinemia. The remaining 64 symptomatic PPR-AEs affected 2.0% of the total number of subjects. Fifteen events in 13 participants (0.41% of patients or 4.7 events/1000 patients) required treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians should periodically assess patients on paliperidone palmitate for any PPR-AEs and carefully assess the benefits and risks when managing these effects.

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)0.087
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.123
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.087
Threshold uncertainty score0.458

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0870.123
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.009
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.093
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.365 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of PharmacotherapySame topicPituitary Gland Disorders and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207