Memantine for Refractory Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder: Protocol for a Pragmatic, Double-blind, Randomized, Parallel-Group, Placebo-Controlled, Monocenter Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
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 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 | 0.020 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.056 | 0.010 |
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".