MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4294189264 · doi:10.1192/j.eurpsy.2022.419

Cariprazine’s efficacy in treating affective symptoms – pooled data from schizophrenia and bipolar depression trials

2022· article· en· W4294189264 on OpenAlexaff
R. W. McIntyre, Z.B. Dombi, Á. Barabássy, G. Németh

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Psychiatry · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychologyAnxietySchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)Bipolar disorderPlaceboDepression (economics)PopulationPsychiatryInternal medicineClinical psychologyPositive and Negative Syndrome ScalePsychosisMedicineMood

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Affective symptoms are a common feature of schizophrenia and define bipolar disorder. Alterations in dopamine neurotransmission and activity at D3-D2 receptors is associated with depressive symptoms providing the rationale for targeting D3-D2 receptors with partial agonists. Objectives The aim of the analysis herein is to examine and compare the efficacy of cariprazine in treating affective symptoms in both schizophrenia and bipolar depression. Methods Data from 3 schizophrenia [NCT00694707, NCT01104766, NCT01104779] and 3 bipolar I depression studies [NCT013896447, NCT02670538, NCT0267055] were pooled for the analyses. To investigate efficacy across individual affective symptoms, the Marder anxiety/depression and negative symptom items of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and single items of the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) were analysed. Improvement across affective symptoms was examined primarily evaluating least square mean differences (LSMDs) in comparison to placebo in mean change from baseline. Results The pooled ITT population was comprised of persons with schizophrenia (placebo=442, cariprazine=1024) and bipolar disorder (placebo=460, cariprazine=923). Cariprazine resulted in a significantly greater reduction when compared to placebo in three out of the four Marder anxiety/depression items; anxiety (p<0.01), tension (p<0.001) and depression (p<0.05). Similarly, cariprazine was significantly better than placebo in 9 out of the 10 MADRS individual items; apparent sadness (p<0.001), reported sadness (p<0.001), reduced sleep (p<0.05), reduced appetite (p<0.001), concentration difficulties (p<0.001), lassitude (p<0.001), inability to feel (p<0.001), pessimistic thoughts (p<0.01) and suicidal thoughts (p<0.05). Conclusions The results herein indicate that cariprazine treatment is significantly effective at treating affective symptoms in persons with both schizophrenia and bipolar I depression. Disclosure I am an employee of Gedeon Richter Plc.

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.011
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

Study designMeta-analysis
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Psychiatry→Same topicAnxiety, Depression, Psychometrics, Treatment, Cognitive Processes→French-language works237,207→