Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22420580›Full record

ArticleClinical pharmacokinetics2012

Modelling and simulation of the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) time course and dropout hazard in placebo arms of schizophrenia clinical trials.

Venkatesh Pilla Reddy, Magdalena Kozielska, Martin Johnson, Ahmed Abbas Suleiman, An Vermeulen, Jing Liu, Rik de Greef, Geny M M Groothuis, Meindert Danhof, Johannes H Proost

Abstract readComparative StudyValidation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical pharmacokinetics, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
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

10 authors.

Venkatesh Pilla ReddyDivision of Pharmacokinetics, Toxicology and Targeting, University Centre for Pharmacy, University of Groningen, the Netherlands.
Magdalena Kozielska
Martin Johnson
Ahmed Abbas Suleiman
An Vermeulen
Jing Liu
Rik de Greef
Geny M M Groothuis
Meindert Danhof
Johannes H Proost

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND

objectivesThe likelihood of detecting a therapeutic signal of an effective drug for schizophrenia is impeded by a high placebo effect and by high dropout of patients. Several unsuccessful trials of schizophrenia, at least partly due to highly variable placebo effects, have indicated the necessity for a robust methodology to evaluate such a placebo effect and reasons for dropout. Hence, the objectives of this analysis were to (i) develop a longitudinal placebo model that accounts for dropouts and predictors of the placebo effect, using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) score; (ii) compare the performance of empirical and semi-mechanistic placebo models; and (iii) compare different time-to-event (TTE) dropout modelling approaches used to account for dropouts.

methodsThe PANSS scores from 1436 individual patients were used to develop and validate a placebo model. This pooled dataset included 16 trials (conducted between 1989 and 2009), with different study durations, in both acute and chronic schizophrenic patients. A nonlinear mixed-effects modelling approach was employed, using NONMEM VII software.

resultsAmong the different tested placebo models, the Weibull model and the indirect response model adequately described the PANSS data. Covariate analysis showed that the disease condition, study duration, study year, geographic region where the trial was conducted, and route of administration were important predictors for the placebo effect. All three parametric TTE dropout models, namely the exponential, Weibull and Gompertz models, described the probability of patients dropping out from a clinical trial equally well. The study duration and trial phase were found to be predictors for high dropout rates. Results of joint modelling of the placebo effect and dropouts indicated that the probability of patients dropping out is associated with an observed high PANSS score. The indirect response model was found to be a slightly better model than the Weibull placebo model to describe the time course of the PANSS score.

conclusionsOur modelling approach was shown to adequately simulate the longitudinal PANSS data and the dropout trends after placebo treatment. Data analyses suggest that the Weibull and indirect response models are more robust than other placebo models to describe the nonlinear trends in the PANSS score. The developed placebo models, accounting for dropouts and predictors of the placebo effect, could be a useful tool in the evaluation of new trial designs and for better quantification of antipsychotic drug effects.

Indexed as

Models, TheoreticalAdolescentAdultAgedAntipsychotic AgentsComputer SimulationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNonlinear DynamicsPatient DropoutsPlacebo EffectPsychiatric Status Rating ScalesRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSchizophreniaAntipsychotic Agents

Identifiers

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.