Optimisation of pharmacotherapy in psychiatry through therapeutic drug monitoring, molecular brain imaging and pharmacogenetic tests: Focus on antipsychotics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: For psychotic disorders (i.e. schizophrenia), pharmacotherapy plays a key role in controlling acute and long-term symptoms. To find the optimal individual dose and dosage strategy, specialised tools are used. Three tools have been proven useful to personalise drug treatments: therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of drug levels, pharmacogenetic testing (PG), and molecular neuroimaging. METHODS: In these Guidelines, we provide an in-depth review of pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacogenetics for 45 antipsychotics. Over 30 international experts in psychiatry selected studies that have measured drug concentrations in the blood (TDM), gene polymorphisms of enzymes involved in drug metabolism, or receptor/transporter occupancies in the brain (positron emission tomography (PET)). RESULTS: Study results strongly support the use of TDM and the cytochrome P450 (CYP) genotyping and/or phenotyping to guide drug therapies. Evidence-based target ranges are available for titrating drug doses that are often supported by PET findings. CONCLUSION: All three tools discussed in these Guidelines are essential for drug treatment. TDM goes well beyond typical indications such as unclear compliance and polypharmacy. Despite its enormous potential to optimise treatment effects, minimise side effects and ultimately reduce the global burden of diseases, personalised drug treatment has not yet become the standard of care in psychiatry.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it