A pilot, open‐label, 8‐week study evaluating the efficacy, safety and tolerability of adjunctive minocycline for the treatment of bipolar I/II depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The objectives of the study were to determine if adjunctive minocycline mitigates depressive symptom severity and improves cognitive function in individuals with bipolar I/II disorder (BD). The study also aimed to determine if changes in depressive and/or cognitive symptoms over the course of treatment were associated with changes in circulating inflammatory cytokine levels. METHODS: A total of 29 (intention-to-treat: n=27) adults meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for a major depressive episode as part of bipolar I or II disorder (i.e. Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item [HAMD-17] ≥20) were enrolled in an 8-week, open-label study with adjunctive minocycline (100 mg bid). The primary outcome measure was the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). The HAMD-17, Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S), cognitive test composite scores and plasma cytokines were secondary outcome measures. Plasma cytokines were measured with the 30 V-Plex Immunoassay from Meso Scale Discovery. RESULTS: Adjunctive minocycline was associated with a reduction in depressive symptom severity from baseline to week 8 on the MADRS (P<.001, d=0.835), HAMD-17 (P<.001, d=0.949) and CGI-S (P<.001, d=1.09). Improvement in psychomotor speed, but not verbal memory or executive function, was observed only amongst individuals exhibiting a reduction in depression severity (P=.007, d=0.826). Levels of interleukin (IL)-12/23p40 (P=.002) were increased, while levels of IL-12p70 (P=.001) and C-C motif chemokine ligand 26 (CCL26) (P<.001) were reduced from baseline to week 8. A reduction in CCL26 levels was associated with a less favourable treatment response (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results from the pilot study suggest that adjunctive minocycline may exert antidepressant effects in individuals with bipolar depression, possibly by targeting inflammatory cytokines.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".