MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210519941 · doi:10.4088/jcp.21m14022

Treating Insulin Resistance With Metformin as a Strategy to Improve Clinical Outcomes in Treatment-Resistant Bipolar Depression (the TRIO-BD Study)

2022· article· en· W4210519941 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Clinical Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsCentre for Addiction and Mental HealthHealth Sciences CentreQueen Elizabeth II Health Sciences CentreNova Scotia Health AuthorityDalhousie University
FundersHealth Canada
KeywordsMetforminInsulin resistanceDepression (economics)Bipolar disorderDiabetes mellitusMEDLINE

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective: Therapeutic options are limited for treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD). Insulin resistance (IR) confers increased risk for TRBD. We investigated metformin, an insulin sensitizer, to reverse IR and improve clinical outcomes in TRBD. Methods: Using a random-assignment (1:1), intent-to-treat, 2-site, quadruple-masked, parallel-group (metformin to 2,000 mg/d or placebo) clinical trial design, patients with DSM-5 bipolar disorder (BD) type I or II and IR received study medication for 26 weeks (February 2016 to October 2019). The primary outcome was the change in depression rating scores (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale ) at 14 weeks between those who no longer met IR criteria (converters) and those who still did (non-converters). Additional outcomes included scores on the Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF); the Clinical Global Impressions Scale, Bipolar Disorders version (CGI-BP); and the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) and maintenance of improved outcomes up to 26 weeks. Results: Forty-five BD patients were randomized to metformin (n = 20) or placebo (n = 25), and at 14 weeks or later, 11 subjects no longer met IR criteria (n = 10 with metformin, n = 1 with placebo; P = .0009). These converters experienced significant improvements in MADRS (P values ranged from .031 to .008) and GAF (P values ranged from .045 to .008) scores compared to non-converters beginning at week 6, sustained to week 26. HAM-A (P = .022 at week 14 and .019 at week 26) and CGI-BP change scores (P = .046 at 26 weeks) significantly favored converters over non-converters. Effect sizes were large for the MADRS and GAF (Cohen d > 1 at 14 and 26 weeks) and large for the HAM-A and CGI-BP at 26 weeks. Transient gastrointestinal side effects occurred under both treatment conditions. Conclusions: Pending replication, this early study suggests that reversal of IR by metformin offers a path out of TRBD. Further characterization of metformin converters with TRBD will prove informative. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519543

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.068
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.045
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations76
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Clinical PsychiatrySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207