The Emerging Role of Pimavanserin in the Management of Parkinson’s Disease Psychosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A panel of experts drawn from neurology, psychiatry, geropsychiatry, geriatrics, and pharmacy representatives of 3 health plans convened in New York City on July 30, 2016, with the objective of sharing opinions, ideas, and information regarding the optimal management of Parkinson's disease psychosis (PDP). Three key points emerged from the discussion: (1) Because of the nature of Parkinson's disease and PDP, finding appropriate treatment can prove challenging; (2) emerging therapies may present an opportunity for effective disease management; and (3) moving forward, provider and patient education regarding PDP and available treatment options is essential for well-managed symptoms and better quality of life. The panel reviewed current practices and formulated recommendations on moving forward in the treatment of PDP. DISCLOSURES: This project and manuscript was funded by ACADIA Pharmaceuticals and developed by Magellan Rx Management. Lopes and Farnum are employees of Magellan Rx Management. Kremens has received consulting/speaker fees from Teva Pharmaceuticals, UCB, Sunovion, Impax, Lundbeck, ACADIA, USWorldMeds, Merz, Acorda, Kyowa, Neurocrine, and GE Healthcare. Pagan reports consulting/speaker fees from Teva Nanoscience, AbbVie, Impax, ACADIA, Medtronic, USWorldMeds, Merz, and Cynapsus and research and educational grants from USWorldMeds, Teva, and Medtronic. Patel has received consultant/speaker fees from ACADIA, Allergen, and Avanir. Alva reports research support from Accera, Allergan, Axovant, Eisai, Neurotrope, Genentech, Intra Cellular, Janssen, Lundbeck, Neurim, Novartis, Otsuka, Roche, Suven, and Trans Tech and consultant/speaker fees from ACADIA, Alkermes, Allergan, Avanir, Janssen, Lundbeck, Merck, Nestle, Otsuka, Sunovion, Takeda, and Vanda. The other authors report no potential conflicts of interest, financial or otherwise.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".