MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157418458 · doi:10.1111/eip.12134

Quetiapine<scp>XR</scp>‐induced neutropenia: is a clozapine trial still possible for treatment‐resistant schizophrenia? A case report

2014· article· en· W2157418458 on OpenAlexaff
Gabrielle Crépeau‐Gendron, Sophie L’Heureux

Bibliographic record

VenueEarly Intervention in Psychiatry · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBlood disorders and treatments
Canadian institutionsInstitut Universitaire en Santé Mentale de QuébecCentre hospitalier universitaire de QuébecUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuetiapineClozapineNeutropeniaMedicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PsychiatryRefractory (planetary science)PsychosisAbsolute neutrophil countInternal medicinePediatricsChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Our case report addresses the use of clozapine in patients who have a history of quetiapine XR-induced neutropenia. There are no current guidelines for this situation. METHODS: We present the case of a young woman treated with clozapine at a first-episode psychosis clinic after a moderate quetiapine XR-induced neutropenia (0,5-1,0 × 10(9) L(-1) ). RESULTS: The patient was successfully treated with clozapine and lithium, with less psychotic symptoms and a better level of functioning. The neutrophil count remained normal during the treatment period, which has been longer than a year. CONCLUSION: The outcome of this case supports the notion that clinicians could consider introducing clozapine in treatment-refractory patients who have a history of quetiapine XR-induced neutropenia, with close blood monitoring. Lithium co-administration may play a role in maintaining a normal neutrophil count.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0040.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations9
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEarly Intervention in PsychiatrySame topicBlood disorders and treatmentsFrench-language works237,207