MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4352987220 · doi:10.2196/39223

Memantine for Refractory Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Protocol for a Pragmatic, Double-blind, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Placebo-Controlled, Monocenter Trial

2023· article· en· W4352987220 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Annalisa Maraone, Alessandro Trebbastoni, Antonella Di Vita, Fabrizia D’Antonio, Carlo de Lena, Massimo Pasquini

Bibliographic record

VenueJMIR Research Protocols · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMemantineRandomized controlled trialPsychologyAnterior cingulate cortexPopulationPsychiatryGlutamatergicDiscontinuationMedicineClinical psychologyInternal medicineDementiaCognitionGlutamate receptorDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD) is a psychiatric syndrome characterized by unwanted and repetitive thoughts and repeated ritualistic compulsions for decreasing distress. Symptoms can cause severe distress and functional impairment. OCD affects 2% to 3% of the population and is ranked within the 10 leading neuropsychiatric causes of disability. Cortico-striatal-thalamo-cortical circuitry dysfunction has been implicated in OCD, including altered brain activation and connectivity. Complex glutamatergic signaling dysregulation within cortico-striatal circuitry has been proposed in OCD. Data obtained by several studies indicate reduced glutamatergic concentrations in the anterior cingulate cortex, combined with overactive glutamatergic signaling in the striatum and orbitofrontal cortex. A growing number of randomized controlled trials have assessed the utility of different glutamate-modulating drugs as augmentation medications or monotherapies for OCD, including refractory OCD. However, there are relevant variations among studies in terms of patients' treatment resistance, comorbidity, age, and gender. At present, 4 randomized controlled trials are available on the efficacy of memantine as an augmentation medication for refractory OCD. OBJECTIVE: Our study's main purpose is to conduct a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, monocenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of memantine as an augmentative agent to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in the treatment of moderate to severe OCD. The study's second aim is to evaluate the effect of memantine on cognitive functions in patients with OCD. The third aim is to investigate if responses to memantine are modulated by variables such as gender, symptom subtypes, and the duration of untreated illness. METHODS: Investigators intend to conduct a double-blind, randomized, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, monocenter trial to assess the efficacy and safety of memantine as an augmentative agent to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor in the treatment of patients affected by severe refractory OCD. Participants will be rated via the Yale-Brown Obsessive Compulsive Scale at baseline and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, and 12 months. During the screening period and T4 and T6 follow-up visits, all participants will undergo an extensive neuropsychological evaluation. The 52-week study duration will consist of 4 distinct periods, including memantine titration and follow-up periods. RESULTS: Recruitment has not yet started. The study will be conducted from June 2023 to December 2024. Results are expected to be available in January 2025. Throughout the slow-titration period, we will observe the minimum effective dose of memantine, and the follow-up procedure will detail its residual efficacy after drug withdrawal. CONCLUSIONS: The innovation of this research proposal is not limited to the evaluation of the efficacy and safety of memantine as an augmentation medication for OCD. We will also test if memantine acts as a pure antiobsessive medication or if memantine's ability to improve concentration and attention mimics an antiobsessive effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05015595; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05015595. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): PRR1-10.2196/39223.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.180
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.155
GPT teacher head0.527
Teacher spread0.371 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJMIR Research ProtocolsSame topicObsessive-Compulsive Spectrum DisordersFrench-language works237,207