Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21522162›Full record

ArticleJournal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism2011

Calculating occupancy when one does not have baseline: a comparison of different options.

Euitae Kim, Oliver D Howes, Kyung-Sang Yu, Jae Min Jeong, Jae Sung Lee, In-Jin Jang, Sang-Goo Shin, Shitij Kapur, Jun Soo Kwon

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of cerebral blood flow and metabolism : official journal of the International Society of Cerebral Blood Flow and Metabolism, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Dopamine DNeuropsychopharmacology : official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology · 2019
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Euitae KimDepartment of Psychiatry, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Oliver D Howes
Kyung-Sang Yu
Jae Min Jeong
Jae Sung Lee
In-Jin Jang
Sang-Goo Shin
Shitij Kapur
Jun Soo Kwon

Funding

Medical Research Council G0700995Medical Research Council MC_U120097115Medical Research Council U.1200.04.007.00001.01
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Dopamine D(2) receptor occupancy of antipsychotic drugs is calculated relative to the subject's D(2) receptor binding potential (BP) in the drug-free state (baseline BP). Because baseline BP is seldom known in patients with schizophrenia, population means from unrelated control samples are often used to estimate it. However, this is likely to introduce bias and error into the occupancy measure. There is thus a need for a method to reliably estimate baseline BP for patient populations in whom it may be impractical or unethical to get baseline measurements. It has been previously found that the relationship between plasma concentration and dopamine receptor occupancy by antipsychotic drugs follows a sigmoid E(max) model. Based on this, we developed a method for calculating dopamine D(2) receptor occupancy by antipsychotic drugs using an inhibitory E(max) model (I(max) method) that estimates individual baseline BPs. To validate this, we compared the result from the I(max) method with actual occupancy and estimated occupancy calculated from the average baseline BP (substitution method). The data for validation were obtained from two different receptor occupancy studies with the antipsychotic medications YKP1358 and aripiprazole. We estimated the reliability between the true measured occupancy and the predicted occupancy using the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC), and the variability of occupancy was also compared between the I(max) and substitution methods. In YKP1358 study, all the ICCs of the I(max) method were above 0.8, but those of the substitution method showed values lower than 0.8. In aripiprazole study, the ICCs of the I(max) method were higher than those of the substitution method, but all the ICCs showed higher values than 0.8. The variability of I(max) method was significantly smaller than that of substitution method in both studies. The I(max) method shows better reliability and less variability than the substitution method. The I(max) method can be applied for receptor occupancy study, and bring more reliability and accuracy to the occupancy study in patients with schizophrenia.

Indexed as

AdultAlkaloidsAntipsychotic AgentsAripiprazoleHumansMaleMethodsPiperazinesPositron-Emission TomographyProtein BindingQuinolonesReceptors, Dopamine D2Reproducibility of ResultsSchizophreniaYoung AdultAlkaloidsAntipsychotic AgentsAripiprazolePiperazinesQuinolonesReceptors, Dopamine D2YKP 1358

Identifiers

PMID21522162
PMCPMC3170949

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.