MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600431307 · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0173872

Bupropion for the treatment of apathy in Huntington’s disease: A multicenter, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, prospective crossover trial

2017· article· en· W2600431307 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Torsten Wüstenberg, Tim McLean, Lisanne Mütze, Wilhelm Fischer, Carsten Saft, Rainer Hoffmann, Sigurd D. Süßmuth, Peter Schlattmann, Erik van Duijn, G. Bernhard Landwehrmeyer, Josef Priller

Bibliographic record

VenuePLoS ONE · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean Huntington's Disease NetworkMedical Research CouncilHuntington Society of CanadaBladder Cancer Advocacy Network
KeywordsApathyBupropionPlaceboCrossover studyHuntington's diseaseMedicineDouble blindInternal medicinePsychiatryDiseasePhysical therapyAlternative medicinePathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bupropion in the treatment of apathy in Huntington's disease (HD). METHODS: In this phase 2b multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover trial, individuals with HD and clinical signs of apathy according to the Structured Clinical Interview for Apathy-Dementia (SCIA-D), but not depression (n = 40) were randomized to receive either bupropion 150/300mg or placebo daily for 10 weeks. The primary outcome parameter was a significant change of the Apathy Evaluation Scale (AES) score after ten weeks of treatment as judged by an informant (AES-I) living in close proximity with the study participant. The secondary outcome parameters included changes of 1. AES scores determined by the patient (AES-S) or the clinical investigator (AES-C), 2. psychiatric symptoms (NPI, HADS-SIS, UHDRS-Behavior), 3. cognitive performance (SDMT, Stroop, VFT, MMSE), 4. motor symptoms (UHDRS-Motor), 5. activities of daily function (TFC, UHDRS-Function), and 6. caregiver distress (NPI-D). In addition, we investigated the effect of bupropion on brain structure as well as brain responses and functional connectivity during reward processing in a gambling task using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). RESULTS: At baseline, there were no significant treatment group differences in the clinical primary and secondary outcome parameters. At endpoint, there was no statistically significant difference between treatment groups for all clinical primary and secondary outcome variables. Study participation, irrespective of the intervention, lessened symptoms of apathy according to the informant and the clinical investigator. CONCLUSION: Bupropion does not alleviate apathy in HD. However, study participation/placebo effects were observed, which document the need for carefully controlled trials when investigating therapeutic interventions for the neuropsychiatric symptoms of HD. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov 01914965.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.693

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.094
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations54
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePLoS ONESame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207