Tolerability of cariprazine in the treatment of acute bipolar I mania: A pooled post hoc analysis of 3 phase II/III studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Atypical antipsychotics have broad-spectrum efficacy against core symptoms of acute mania/mixed states in bipolar disorder; however, they are associated with clinically significant adverse effects (AEs). METHODS: This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and tolerability of the atypical antipsychotic cariprazine in the treatment of adult patients with acute manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder. Data were taken from three 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose trials of cariprazine 3-12mg/d. Patient subgroups categorized by modal daily dose (3-6mg/d; 9-12mg/d) were used to assess dose response. RESULTS: The pooled safety population comprised 1065 patients (placebo=442; cariprazine 3-6mg/d=263; cariprazine 9-12mg/d=360). More cariprazine- than placebo-treated patients reported double-blind treatment-emergent AEs; the overall AE incidence was similar among cariprazine-dose groups. AEs reported in ≥5% of cariprazine patients overall with at least twice the incidence of placebo were akathisia, extrapyramidal symptoms, restlessness, and vomiting. The incidence of SAEs was low and similar between the placebo- and cariprazine-treatment groups. Metabolic parameter changes were small and generally similar between cariprazine and placebo groups; mean increases in fasting glucose levels were greater with cariprazine (3-6mg/d=6.6mg/dL; 9-12mg/d=7.2mg/dL) than placebo (1.7mg/dL). Mean weight change was 0.54kg and 0.17kg for cariprazine and placebo, respectively; weight increase ≥7% was <3% in all treatment groups. Cariprazine was not associated with clinically meaningful changes in electrocardiogram parameters. LIMITATIONS: Post hoc analysis, flexible-dose design, short trial duration. CONCLUSION: Cariprazine was generally safe and well-tolerated in patients with manic/mixed episodes associated with bipolar I 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 | 0.022 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".