MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406254644 · doi:10.1017/s1092852924001603

Incidence and Characteristics of Akathisia with Adjunctive Cariprazine Treatment in Patients with Major Depressive Disorder

2024· article· en· W4406254644 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tina Matthews-Hayes, Theresa R. Cerulli, Jun Yu, Julie Adams, Majid Kerolous

Bibliographic record

VenueCNS Spectrums · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTreatment of Major Depression
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAkathisiaIncidence (geometry)MedicineDepressive symptomsAdjunctive treatmentPsychiatryInternal medicineSchizophrenia (object-oriented programming)AntipsychoticPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Akathisia is a common adverse effect associated with use of dopamine receptor blocking agents. 1,2 Symptoms of akathisia, in severe cases, may lead to discontinuation of treatment. Cariprazine is a dopamine D 3 -preferring D 3 /D 2 receptor partial agonist and serotonin 5-HT 1A receptor partial agonist approved to treat schizophrenia and acute manic, mixed, and depressive episodes of bipolar 1 disorder. Cariprazine is well tolerated in patients across its indications, but is associated with a higher incidence of akathisia compared with placebo. 3,4 This pooled post hoc analysis of data from phase 3 clinical trials of adjunctive cariprazine aimed to characterize the incidence, severity, and management of akathisia and other extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) in adult patients with MDD. Methods Patients with MDD and inadequate response to ongoing antidepressant therapy (ADT) were randomized to cariprazine 1.5 mg/d + ADT, cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT, or placebo + ADT for 6 weeks of double-blind treatment. Post hoc analysis evaluated incidence, severity, and time to resolution of akathisia, restlessness, and other EPS; use of rescue medications; and the rate of discontinuation due to these treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Results A total of 1508 patients (cariprazine + ADT: 1.5 mg/d, n=502, 3 mg/d, n=503; placebo + ADT, n=503) were included in these 2 studies. The incidence of akathisia was greater with cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT (9.7%) than with cariprazine 1.5 mg/d + ADT (6.4%) and placebo + ADT (2.0%). Most patients treated with cariprazine + ADT (94%) experienced only mild or moderate akathisia. The incidence of restlessness was 3.8% for patients treated with cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT, 3.6% for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d + ADT, and 1.8% for placebo + ADT. The incidence of EPS excluding akathisia and restlessness was 4.4% for patients treated with cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT, 4.6% for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d + ADT, and 3.2% for placebo + ADT. For patients treated with cariprazine + ADT and placebo + ADT, respectively, EPS-related study discontinuations were 1.4% and 0.4% due to akathisia, 0.2% and 0.0% due to restlessness, and 0.1% and 0.4% due to EPS excluding akathisia and restlessness. Rescue medications were used to treat EPS-related TEAEs during the double-blind treatment period in 3% of cariprazine-treated patients and 0.4% of placebo-treated patients. The mean time to resolution of akathisia during treatment was slightly shorter in cariprazine-treated patients (15.6 days) versus placebo-treated patients (19.5 days). Importance Incidence of akathisia was higher for cariprazine than placebo, with a lower incidence observed for patients treated with cariprazine 1.5 + ADT than with cariprazine 3 mg/d + ADT, suggestive of a dose related effect. Most patients experienced mild or moderate akathisia. Rates of study discontinuation and rescue medication use due to akathisia were low, suggesting that akathisia was tolerated by most patients. This data was previously presented at the CINP World Congress; Montreal, Canada; May 7-10, 2023. Funding AbbVie

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.548

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCNS SpectrumsSame topicTreatment of Major DepressionFrench-language works237,207