Clinically relevant response and remission outcomes in cariprazine-treated patients with bipolar I disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Rates of response and remission are measures that endorse the clinical significance of treatment. Cariprazine is FDA approved for the acute treatment of schizophrenia and manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder in adults. Post hoc analyses of pooled data from 3 pivotal trials of cariprazine in manic/mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder were conducted to investigate the effect of cariprazine on various criteria of response and remission. METHODS: The constituent studies were 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group phase II/III studies in adult patients (age 18-65 years) with bipolar I disorder (NCT00488618, NCT01058096, NCT01058668). Post hoc analyses included Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) outcomes for response (≥50% decrease in score), remission (total score ≤12 and ≤8), cumulative remission, and global improvement. Additionally, composite remission (YMRS total score ≤12 plus Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score ≤12) and worsening/switch to depression (MADRS total score ≥15) by week were investigated. RESULTS: Rates of response and remission were significantly greater for cariprazine versus placebo on every measure evaluated (P < .01 all analyses); the estimated number needed to treat for each measure was ≤10. There was no evidence of worsening/switch to depression. LIMITATIONS: Post hoc analyses, short treatment duration, no active comparator. DISCUSSION: Cariprazine-treated patients with bipolar I disorder attained clinically significant improvement in manic symptoms as shown by significantly greater rates of response and remission versus placebo; improvement in manic symptoms did not induce depressive symptoms.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".