296. A POPULATION-BASED STUDY ON LONG-TERM MORTALITY RISK ASSOCIATED WITH CLOZAPINE USE AMONG PATIENTS WITH SCHIZOPHRENIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Patients with schizophrenia had significant elevated mortality risk. Clozapine is effective for treatment-resistant schizophrenia, but its use is limited because of side effects. Understanding its association with mortality risk in schizophrenia population is crucial. Though meta-analysis reported clozapine use is associated with a significant reduction in all-cause mortality mainly for patients who are continuously treated with clozapine, inconsistent results were reported in more recent studies. Furthermore, few studies reported on relationship of clozapine use and specific cause of mortality including suicide. Aims & Objectives To investigate the association of clozapine with all-cause and cause-specific mortality risk in patients with schizophrenia. Method This 18-year population-based cohort study retrieved records of schizophrenia patients from the electronic clinical records of all public hospitals in Hong Kong. Clozapine users (ClozUs) comprised schizophrenia patients who initiated clozapine treatment between 2003 and 2012, with the index date set at clozapine initiation. Comparators were non-clozapine antipsychotic users (Non-ClozUs) of the same diagnosis without a clozapine prescription ever. They were 1:2 propensity-score matched with demographic characteristics and physical and psychiatric comorbidities. ClozUs were further defined according to the continuation of clozapine use and co-prescribed with other antipsychotics (polypharmacy). Accelerated failure time (AFT) models were applied to estimate the risk of all-cause and cause-specific mortalities (i.e., suicide, cardiovascular disease, infection, and cancer). Results This study included 9,456 individuals, with 2,020 continuous ClozUs (mean [SD] age at the index date, 37.54 [12.42] years; 49.6% females; median [IQR] follow-up time, 12.30 [9.72–15.10] years), 1,132 discontinuous users (40.67 [13.01] years; 53.45% females; 12.61 [10.05–15.45] years), and 6,304 Non-ClozUs (39.37 [13.01] years; 50.6% females; 12.36 [9.73–15.19] years). Using adjusted AFT models accounted for Bonferroni Correction, continuous ClozUs exhibited a lower risk of suicide mortality (AF, 3.01, 99% CI, 1.41–6.44) compared to continuous Non-ClozUs. Continuous clozapine polypharmacy exhibited a lower risk of suicide mortality (3.67; 1.41–9.60) and all-cause mortality (1.42; 1.07–1.88) compared to continuous Non-ClozUs. Discussion & Conclusions These results add to the existing evidence on clozapine’s effectiveness, particularly its anti-suicide effects, and emphasize the need for continuous clozapine use for suitable patients and the possible benefit of clozapine polypharmacy.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".