MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The efficacy of lumateperone on symptoms of depression in bipolar I and bipolar II disorder: Secondary and post hoc analyses

2023· article· en· W4316340089 on OpenAlexaff
Roger S. McIntyre, Suresh Durgam, Susan G Kozauer, Richard Chen, Jason Huo, Robert E. Davis, Andrew J. Cutler

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Neuropsychopharmacology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBipolar Disorder and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBipolar disorderPlaceboAnhedoniaBipolar II disorderDepression (economics)PsychologyPost-hoc analysisPsychiatryBipolar I disorderPopulationInternal medicineRandomized controlled trialPost hocClinical psychologyManiaMedicineMoodSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

• Lumateperone 42 mg significantly improved MADRS total score in bipolar depression. • Six-weeks lumateperone 42 mg monotherapy significantly improved all 10 MADRS items. • Most MADRS items significantly improved in Bipolar I (9 items) and II (8) subgroups. • Lumateperone 42 mg significantly improved the MADRS anhedonia factor. • Lumateperone is effective to treat a broad range of bipolar depression symptoms. A recent Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study established that lumateperone 42-mg monotherapy significantly improved symptoms of depression in patients with bipolar depression. This manuscript reports prespecified secondary and post hoc efficacy analyses. Patients with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder experiencing a major depressive episode were randomized 1:1 to lumateperone 42 mg or placebo, administered orally once daily for 6 weeks. Prespecified analyses evaluated change from baseline to Day 43 in individual Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item scores in the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT) and bipolar I and bipolar II disorder subgroups. Post hoc analyses investigated the MADRS anhedonia factor and categorical shifts in MADRS item scores. In the mITT, there was significant improvement from baseline to Day 43 with lumateperone 42 mg compared with placebo for all 10 MADRS items; most MADRS items significantly improved in subgroups with bipolar I (9 items) and bipolar II disorder (8 items). A significantly higher proportion of patients receiving lumateperone compared with placebo shifted from baseline MADRS item score ≥4 to ≤2 at end of treatment in Reported Sadness, Reduced Sleep, Concentration Difficulties, Lassitude, Inability to Feel, and Pessimistic Thoughts. Lumateperone significantly improved the MADRS anhedonia factor from baseline to Day 43 compared with placebo in the mITT (effect size, −0.47) and subgroups with bipolar I (−0.36) and bipolar II disorder (−0.90). Lumateperone 42 mg treatment significantly improved depression symptoms compared with placebo, with consistent efficacy across a broad range of symptoms in people with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.762
Threshold uncertainty score0.570

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.317
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 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

Citations45
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean NeuropsychopharmacologySame topicBipolar Disorder and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207