Sensitivity of Older Patients to Antipsychotic Motor Side Effects: A PET Study Examining Potential Mechanisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Objective: It is generally held that the elderly are more sensitive to motor side effects of antipsychotics, although the mechanisms for such an effect are not fully understood. The objective of this study was to examine whether this sensitivity is due to a central pharmacokinetic (i.e., higher occupancy for a given plasma level) or pharmacodynamic (i.e., greater functional effects for a given occupancy) effect. Design: Crossectional. Setting: Centre for Addiction and Mental Health, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Participants: Thirteen subjects aged 50 (mean +/- standard deviation age: 62 +/- 9 years) with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder who were receiving risperidone. Measurements: Dopamine D-2 bingind potential in the striatum, using [C-11]raclopride positron emission tomography scan. D-2 receptor occupancy was calculated, using age-corrected measure from healthy individuals and region of interest analysis. Results: The authors observed the expected nonlinear relationship between total risperidone and 9-hydroxyrisperidone plasma level and striatal D-2 receptor occupancy. The estimated plasma level of risperidone plus 9-hydroxyrisperidone associated with 50% maximal receptor occupancy was 7.3 ng/mL, which is similar to what has been reported in younger patients. However, extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) were observed in seven subjects at D-2 occupancy of 34%-79%, occupancy levels that are lower than previously reported for younger patients in whom EPS are rare at occupancies lower than 80%. Conclusion: The observation of greater functional effect (EPS in this case) for a given drug occupancy than the younger patients supports a pharmacodynamic mechanism for age-related antipsychotic drug sensitivity. This finding has important implications for dosing of antipsychotics in older patients with schizophrenia. (Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 2009; 17:255-263)
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".