Cited by 30

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cognitive Effects of MIN-101 in Patients With Schizophrenia and Negative Symptoms: Results From a Randomized Controlled Trial

Keefe, Richard S. E., Harvey, Philip D., Khan, Anzalee, Saoud, Jay B., Staner, Corinne, Davidson, Michael, Luthringer, Remy·2018·The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry

Abstract

Objective Current dopamine-blocking antipsychotic drugs have little impact on the cognitive deficits associated with schizophrenia. We evaluated whether MIN-101, a molecule that combines sigma-2 antagonism and 5-HT2A antagonism, might improve cognitive deficits in individuals with moderate to severe negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Methods Individuals (N = 244) aged 18 to 60 years with stable symptoms of DSM-5-defined schizophrenia and moderate to severe negative symptoms were randomized to placebo (n = 83), MIN-101 32 mg (n = 78), or MIN-101 64 mg (n = 83) in a 12-week, phase 2b, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial between May 2015 and December 2015. In a post hoc analysis, mean z and T score changes from baseline at 12 weeks of treatment in the cognitive composite score and individual tests on the Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia (BACS) Battery were compared between MIN-101 and placebo. Results A total of 79 patients (95.2%) from the placebo group, 76 (97.4%) from the MIN-101 32 mg group, and 79 (95.2%) from the MIN-101 64 mg group completed the BACS at baseline. The BACS token motor (P = .04), verbal fluency (P = .01), and composite z scores (P = .05) showed significant improvements in the MIN-101 32 mg group compared to the placebo group. At week 4, the clinical improvements from baseline in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) negative factor showed a significant correlation with improvements from baseline on t…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.4088/jcp.17m11753

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Keefe, R. S. E., Harvey, P. D., Khan, A., Saoud, J. B., Staner, C., Davidson, M., & Luthringer, R.
Venue
The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry
Published
2018-06-27
Volume
79
Issue
3
ISSN
0160-6689
Cited by
30
References
3

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review