Cariprazine for the treatment of bipolar mania with mixed features: A post hoc pooled analysis of 3 trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: When bipolar I disorder (BP-I) mania is accompanied by subsyndromal depressive symptoms, a more complicated illness presentation results. To qualify for the mixed features specifier during mania, the DSM-5 requires ≥3 "non-overlapping" depressive symptoms (DS); notwithstanding, concerns of this definition's ecological validity and implications for timely diagnosis remain. METHODS: Herein, patients were pooled from three similarly-designed pivotal trials of cariprazine compared to placebo for BP-I mania (NCT00488618/NCT01058096/NCT01058668) in post hoc analyses of mixed features using three criteria: ≥3 DS (DSM-5), ≥2 DS, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥10. Efficacy of cariprazine compared to placebo was assessed (Week 3) by Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and MADRS scores and rates of mania response and remission. RESULTS: In pooled patients (N = 1037), cariprazine significantly improved mean YMRS scores compared to placebo for each criterion; LSMDs were ≥3 DS = -3.79 (P = .0248), ≥2 DS = -2.91 (P = .0207), and ≥10 MADRS = -5.49 (P < .0001). More cariprazine- than placebo-treated patients met YMRS response and remission criteria, reaching significance for response in ≥2 DS (34% versus 47%; number-needed-to-treat [NNT] = 8, P = .0483) and ≥10 MADRS (31% versus 57%, NNT = 4, P < .0001) and for remission in ≥2 DS (27% versus 39%, NNT = 9, P = .0462), ≥10 MADRS (23% versus 44%, NNT = 5, P < .0001). Depressive symptoms were improved compared to placebo, reaching statistical significance in the MADRS ≥10 subgroup (LSMD = -1.59, P = .0082). LIMITATIONS: Post hoc analysis, MADRS < 18 entry criterion may have prevented assessment of MADRS changes. CONCLUSIONS: Cariprazine significantly reduced manic and depressive symptoms in patients with mixed features with differential efficacy across the subgroups analyzed herein.
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 | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.022 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".