MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406224879 · doi:10.1002/alz.085738

Escitalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer’s Dementia

2024· article· en· W4406224879 on OpenAlexaff
Tarek K. Rajji, Sheriza Baksh, David Shade, Zahinoor Ismail, Amer M. Burhan, Hamid Okhravi, Prasad R. Padala, Paul B. Rosenberg, Lon S. Schneider, Anton P. Porsteinsson, Constantine G. Lyketsos

Bibliographic record

VenueAlzheimer s & Dementia · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsOntario Shores Centre for Mental Health SciencesHotchkiss Brain InstituteUniversity of CalgaryCentre for Addiction and Mental Health
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEscitalopramDementiaPsychologyAlzheimer's diseaseMedicinePsychiatryInternal medicineDiseaseAnxietyAntidepressant

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Agitation is a common and disabling symptom of Alzheimer’s dementia (AD). Pharmacological treatments are recommended if agitation is not responsive to psychosocial intervention. Citalopram was effective in treating agitation in AD but was associated with cognitive and cardiac risks linked to its R‐ but not S‐enantiomer. Primary objective of the Escitalopram for Agitation in Alzheimer’s Disease (S‐CitAD) study was to examine the efficacy and safety of escitalopram, in combination with PSI, for the treatment of agitation in patients with AD who fail to respond to psychosocial intervention. A secondary objective was to define groups with agitation most likely to benefit from escitalopram. Method S‐CitAD is an NIH‐funded, multicenter, community‐based, phase 3, double‐masked randomized placebo‐controlled trial. Assessments were conducted at enrollment, following three weeks of psychosocial intervention (baseline), and then weeks 1‐4, 6, 7, 9, 10 and 12. Participants were adults with AD, a telephone Mini‐Mental State Examination Telephone score from 3 to 20, and clinically significant agitation/aggression as assessed by the Neuropsychiatric Inventory with either frequency being “Very frequently”, or frequency being “Frequently” and severity being “Moderate” or “Marked”. Following three weeks of psychosocial intervention alone, participants not showing response were randomized (1:1) to receive escitalopram at a target dose of 15mg/day or placebo for 12 weeks while continuing PSI. Participants who responded to three weeks of psychosocial intervention alone continued to receive the intervention and were monitored on usual care through week 12. Primary outcome was the proportion of participants with clinically significant improvement in agitation from baseline on the modified Alzheimer’s Disease Cooperative Study ‐ Clinical Global Impression of Change (mADCS‐CGIC). Result Two hundred and five (N = 205) participants were enrolled, and 173 were randomized to escitalopram or placebo for 12 weeks while continuing psychosocial intervention. The last participant will complete the study in late winter and mask will be broken in March 2024. Outcomes will be first presented at the AAIC meeting. Conclusion As escitalopram is a most commonly used treatment for disruptive behavior in dementia, the outcomes whether positive or negative will have major clinical impact.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.355
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlzheimer s & DementiaSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207