Lurasidone: Ten Years Treating Adults with Bipolar Depression
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic approved in 2010 in Canada and in the USA for the treatment of adults with schizophrenia or bipolar type I disorder. In 2014 it was approved in the European Union for the treatment of patients with 13 years‑old or older, with schizophrenia. Lurasidone is a benzisothiazole derivative with a binding profile that makes it an antidepressant candidate with a low metabolic impact. In patients with bipolar disorder, depressive episodes tend to be present for the majority of the time and are difficult to treat, as shown in multiple surveys indicating that more than three quarters of patients with bipolar depression receive at least two pharmaceutical drugs and more than one third receive three or more. Some relevant international guidelines include different first‑line options in the treatment of bipolar depression, among which is lurasidone. Considering the difficulties in treating depressive episodes in bipolar disorder, the EU marketing authorization limiting the use of lurasidone in schizophrenia only and the expectable commercialization in Portugal by 2021, we aim to review the literature regarding the efficacy and advantages of lurasidone for depressive episodes of bipolar disorder and to discuss the usefulness of approving this medication as an alternative treatment approach.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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".