MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3028309129 · doi:10.1093/schbul/sbaa031.106

S40. COMBINING PHARMACOTHERAPY OF BI 425809 WITH COMPUTERISED COGNITIVE TRAINING IN PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA: INITIAL EXPERIENCE OF A LARGE-SCALE MULTICENTRE RANDOMISED CLINICAL TRIAL

2020· article· en· W3028309129 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjay Hake, Songqiao Huang, Sean McDonald, Stephane Pollentier, Jana Podhorná

Bibliographic record

VenueSchizophrenia Bulletin · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder
Canadian institutionsBoehringer Ingelheim (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)PlaceboCognitionClinical trialCognitive trainingMedicinePharmacotherapyRandomized controlled trialPsychiatryPsychologyPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background There are currently no approved medications for cognition in patients with schizophrenia. BI 425809, a glycine transporter 1 inhibitor, increases glycine in the synaptic cleft and may improve glutamatergic neurotransmission, synaptic neuroplasticity, and cognition. Pharmacotherapies targeting neuroplasticity may require concurrent cognitive stimulation, and often the surroundings of patients with schizophrenia provide only a low level of cognitive demand. At-home computerised cognitive training (CCT) should increase the level of cognitive stimulation for these patients. Combining CCT with pharmacotherapy could therefore improve cognition in patients with schizophrenia. CCT studies are currently limited in scale and are associated with challenges, such as patient compliance. This ongoing study explores whether at-home CCT combined with BI 425809 could improve cognition, as compared with patients on at-home CCT and placebo, in patients with schizophrenia. Here, we provide an initial reflection on the experiences and challenges associated with setting up this large-scale clinical trial, in addition to an update on recruitment trajectories. Methods This is a Phase II, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group trial in patients with schizophrenia on stable antipsychotic therapy, across ~50 centres in 6 countries. Recruitment commenced in June 2019. Patients (aged 18–50 years) must demonstrate compliance with CCT during a 2-week run-in period; this means completing at least 2 hours/week (i.e. 4 hours total during screening). Only CCT-compliant patients are randomised (1:1) to BI 425809 or placebo once daily on top of CCT for 12 weeks. The target duration for at-home CCT is ~30 hours, across 3–5 sessions (2.5 hours total) per week. The primary endpoint is change from baseline in neurocognitive composite score of the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia Consensus Cognitive Battery after 12 weeks of treatment. Novel exploratory endpoints include the Virtual Reality Functional Capacity Assessment Tool to assess daily functioning and the Balloon Effort Task to assess motivation in cognitive performance and, its association with patients’ willingness to comply with at-home CCT. Results To date, 32 patients have been screened and 11 randomised (21 patients failed screening, primarily due to non-compliance with CCT run-in). The last patient out is planned for December 2020 and results are expected in Q1 2021. Patients randomised so far (n=11; 82% male) have a mean age of 33 years; those who failed screening (n=21; 67% male) have a mean age of 36 years. Mean MCCB total scores for the two groups are 30.9 and 22.3; Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANNS) total scores: 71.3 vs 77.9; and PANNS negative symptom scores: 20.5 vs 20.3, for the randomised and screen failure patients, respectively. Discussion It is expected that the results of this trial will help to: indicate if there is an enhanced benefit of combining pharmacotherapy with cognitive stimulation through at-home CCT; and determine the role of motivation in CCT compliance and performance in patients with schizophrenia. The main reason for screen failures was non-compliance with CCT run-in, underscoring the relevance of coaching and motivational accompaniment to promote adherence to CCT. The results will indicate if large-scale implementation of at-home CCT across multiple centres and several countries is feasible.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.003
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSchizophrenia BulletinSame topicAttention Deficit Hyperactivity DisorderFrench-language works237,207