Evidence Hub

Trajectory of efficacy and safety across ulotaront dose levels in schizophrenia: a systematic review and dose–response meta-analysis

Yu-Chia Hsu, Tzu-Yen Hung, Y. Chen, Kuo-Chuan Hung, Chih-Sung Liang, Ping-Tao Tseng, Yu-Kang Tu, C. Correll et al.

International Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2025

1,144 participants · 3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Ulotaront is an experimental antipsychotic for schizophrenia, but its optimal dose is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate dose–response relationships for efficacy and safety in people with schizophrenia. Methods A systematic review of four databases (until January 22, 2025; INPLASY202510091) identified randomized clinical trials assessing ulotaront. Outcomes included efficacy, measured by changes in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score (primary outcome), positive and negative subdomains, and the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity, and safety, assessed by all-cause dropout (co-primary outcome, dropout due to adverse event, serious, non-serious, and specific adverse events). We employed one-stage dose–response meta-analysis (random-effects model) calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Analysis of three randomized clinical trials (n = 1144) indicated that the 100 mg dose of ulotaront provided the greatest improvement in PANSS total score (standardized mean difference = −0.23 [95% CI: −0.43, −0.02]), PANSS positive symptom score (−0.30 [−0.70, 0.10]), and PANSS negative symptom score (−0.28 [−0.48, −0.08]). However, Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity scores did not exhibit a clear dose–response relationship. Regarding safety, all-cause dropout (RR at 100 mg = 1.10 [95% CI: 0.57, 2.12]), adverse event-related dropout, serious, non-serious, and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 1,144 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free