Dopamine D2 Receptor Occupancy and Cognition in Schizophrenia: Analysis of the CATIE Data
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Antipsychotic drugs exert antipsychotic effects by blocking dopamine D2 receptors in the treatment of schizophrenia. However, effects of D2 receptor blockade on neurocognitive function still remain to be elucidated. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate impacts of estimated dopamine D2 receptor occupancy with antipsychotic drugs on several domains of neurocognitive function in patients with schizophrenia in the Clinical Antipsychotic Trials in Intervention Effectiveness (CATIE) trial. METHODS: The dataset from the CATIE trial was used in the present analysis. Data were extracted from 410 subjects who were treated with risperidone, olanzapine, or ziprasidone, received assessments for neurocognitive functions (verbal memory, vigilance, processing speed, reasoning, and working memory) and psychopathology, and provided plasma samples for the measurement of plasma antipsychotic concentrations. D2 receptor occupancy levels on the day of neurocognitive assessment were estimated from plasma antipsychotic concentrations, using population pharmacokinetic analysis and our recently developed model. A multivariate general linear model was used to examine effects of clinical and demographic characteristics, including estimated D2 occupancy levels, on neurocognitive functions. RESULTS: D2 occupancy levels showed significant associations with the vigilance and the summary scores. Neurocognitive functions, including vigilance, were especially impaired in subjects who showed D2 receptor occupancy level of >77%. DISCUSSION: These findings suggest a nonlinear relationship between prescribed antipsychotic doses and overall neurocognitive function and vigilance. This study shows that D2 occupancy above approximately 80% not only increases the risk for extrapyramidal side effects as consistently reported in the literature but also increases the risk for cognitive impairment.
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 | 0.011 | 0.023 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".