F225. LEVODOPA AUGMENTATION OF ANTIPSYCHOTICS FOR THE TREATMENT OF NEGATIVE SYMPTOMS IN SCHIZOPHRENIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Negative symptoms (i.e., motivation deficits and diminished emotional expression) are prevalent in schizophrenia and consistently linked with functional impairment for affected individuals. Despite advances in psychopharmacology for schizophrenia, there remain no effective treatments for these negative symptoms. Older literature, however, suggests that levodopa in conjunction with antipsychotic treatment can have beneficial effects for patients with schizophrenia. While supporting the safety and potential efficacy of dopamine augmentation, these studies did not evaluate effects within specific symptom domains, particularly negative symptoms. This open-label pilot study was conducted to evaluate the preliminary efficacy and safety of levodopa augmentation of antipsychotics for the treatment of negative symptoms. Ten stable outpatients with schizophrenia between the ages of 18 and 60 were enrolled. All were treated with stable atypical antipsychotic monotherapy for at least eight weeks, and had a minimum total score of 30 on the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS). Participants were treated with adjunctive open-label levodopa/carbidopa, with dose titration to levodopa 300mg TID over 38 days as tolerated, and dose maintenance for the remainder of the eight-week trial. Baseline assessments consisted of the SANS, Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Clinical Global Impression (CGI), Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia (CDSS), MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB), and Quality of Life Scale (QLS) for community functioning. Treatment side effects were evaluated with the Simpson Angus Scale (SAS), Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale (BARS), Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), UKU side effect rating scale (UKU), Liverpool University Neuroleptic Side Effect Rating Scale (LUNSERS), Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale (YBOCS), and Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS). Participants were reassessed on measures of psychosis and side effects weekly for the first four weeks, and every two weeks thereafter. The SANS and CGI were repeated at weeks 4 and 8, with the MCCB and QLS re-administered at week 8. Statistical analyses included the intent-to-treat sample (i.e., participants who received at least one dose of study medication) and consisted of linear mixed models for change in SANS total score (our primary outcome), and change in other clinical and side effects measures as a result of treatment. Enrolled participants (eight male and two female) had a mean age of 37.2 years. Seven participants completed the study, with three participants dropping out. The mean final dose of levodopa for study completers was 835.7 mg (SD 170.1). Levodopa augmentation resulted in a significant improvement in negative symptoms, with a mean SANS reduction for study completers of 15.3 (SD 5.7). This equated to a mean SANS improvement of 25.5% (range 17% to 57%), with 43% of study completers experiencing > 20% improvement in SANS score. Notably, significant improvement in negative symptoms emerged after the first four weeks of treatment. There was no significant change in positive symptoms, nor other clinical outcomes or side effect measures. Our findings suggest that levodopa augmentation of antipsychotics may be an effective and well-tolerated treatment for negative symptoms in schizophrenia. These findings, however, need replication in larger randomized controlled trials. With the dearth of available treatments for negative symptoms, levodopa augmentation may represent a novel pharmacologic strategy to address this critical unmet therapeutic need for schizophrenia.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".