A review of published evidence reporting on the efficacy and pharmacology of lurasidone
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Lurasidone is a benzisothiazol derivative, approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the acute treatment of adults with schizophrenia. Lurasidone's binding affinities are highest for the 5-HT(2A), 5-HT(7), and D(2) receptors; with lower and similar binding affinities for the norepinephrine α(2C) and 5-HT(2C) receptor subtypes. It has demonstrated efficacy in fixed-dose studies across a variable dose range (i.e., 40 - 160 mg), with a recommended starting dose of 40 mg and a maximum recommended dose of 80 mg. Lurasidone's preclinical profile is predictive not only of efficacy against psychotic and negative symptoms but also of affective symptomatology and cognitive deficits. Controlled trials are currently underway to evaluate lurasidone's efficacy in bipolar depression as well as its procognitive effects in individuals with schizophrenia. Lurasidone is administered once a day with ≥ 350 calories of food, regardless of fat content. Lurasidone is not known to adversely affect body composition, anthropometrics, metabolic and/or electrocardiographic parameters. Although prolactin elevation might be observed, prolactin-related adverse events are rarely reported. AREAS COVERED: This paper presents the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of lurasidone, and discusses its efficacy, safety and tolerability data. EXPERT OPINION: Lurasidone's simplicity of use and favorable metabolic profile are distinct advantages relative to several other agents (e.g., olanzapine). Outcomes in cognitive data analyses are awaited to determine if there is a key differentiator between lurasidone and other atypical agents with respect to efficacy. Moreover, lurasidone's efficacy in bipolar depression is awaited to determine whether this agent can be considered as a treatment alternative for depressive symptoms in adults with bipolar disorder.
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 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".