MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799973089 · doi:10.1097/yic.0000000000000223

A pilot, open-label, 8-week study evaluating desvenlafaxine for treatment of major depression in methadone-maintained individuals with opioid use disorder

2018· article· en· W2799973089 on OpenAlexafffund
Cynthia El Hage, Maykel F. Ghabrash, Simon Dubreucq, Suzanne Brissette, François Lespérance, Paul Lespérance, Clairélaine Ouellet‐Plamondon, Julie Bruneau, Didier Jutras‐Aswad

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Clinical Psychopharmacology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersHealth CanadaPfizer CanadaPfizer
KeywordsTolerabilityMethadoneDepression (economics)Methadone maintenanceMedicineMajor depressive disorderInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialPsychiatryClinical trialOpioid use disorderOpioidPsychologyAdverse effectMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Depression is one of the most prevalent psychiatric disorders among opioid-dependent individuals. Clinical trials testing selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors among depressed patients on methadone maintenance therapy (MMT) failed to show efficacy, whereas those on tricyclic antidepressants produced mixed results with potential for cardiotoxicity. Desvenlafaxine (DESV) is a SNRI with minimal cardiotoxicity and drug interactions. This study sought to assess feasibility and tolerability of using DESV in depressed patients on MMT. A total of 18 depressed individuals on MMT received DESV (50-100 mg/day) for 8 weeks. Participants were assessed for the following: (a) Safety of DESV using Systematic Assessment for Treatment Emergent Events-GI, ECG [corrected Q-T (QTc) interval measurement] and methadone serum levels; (b) depressive symptoms using Montgomery-Äsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS); and (c) other outcomes including anxiety, suicidality, craving, substance use, quality of life, and other depression scales. Registration number on ClinicalTrials.gov is NCT02200406. Among participants who completed the study, MADRS scores significantly decreased at week 8 compared with baseline. Responders and remitters on MADRS at week 8 were 61 and 50%, respectively. There was no significant change in [corrected Q-T (QTc) interval measurement] between baseline and week 4. DESV was well tolerated and associated with improvement of depressive symptoms. DESV may be a promising contender to treat depression in individuals on MMT and deserves further exploration in a randomized double-blinded clinical trial.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.240
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.309 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized 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

Citations8
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Clinical PsychopharmacologySame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207