Dataset Information

Early expressions of psychopathology and risk associated with trans-diagnostic transition to mood and psychotic disorders in adolescents and young adults.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

The heterogeneity and comorbidity of major mental disorders presenting in adolescents and young adults has fostered calls for trans-diagnostic research. This study examines early expressions of psychopathology and risk and trans-diagnostic caseness in a community cohort of twins and non-twin siblings.

Methods

Using data from the Brisbane Longitudinal Twin Study, we estimated median number of self-rated psychiatric symptoms, prevalence of subthreshold syndromes, family history of mood and/or psychotic disorders, and likelihood of subsequent trans-diagnostic caseness (individuals meeting diagnostic criteria for mood and/or psychotic syndromes). Next, we used cross-validated Chi-Square Automatic Interaction Detector (CHAID) analyses to identify the nature and relative importance of individual self-rated symptoms that predicted trans-diagnostic caseness. We examined the positive and negative predictive values (PPV; NPV) and accuracy of all classifications (Area under the Curve and 95% confidence intervals: AUC; 95% CI).

Results

Of 1815 participants (Female 1050, 58%; mean age 26.40), more than one in four met caseness criteria for a mood and/or psychotic disorder. Examination of individual factors indicated that the AUC was highest for subthreshold syndromes, followed by family history then self-rated psychiatric symptoms, and that NPV always exceeded PPV for caseness. In contrast, the CHAID analysis (adjusted for age, sex, twin status) generated a classification tree comprising six trans-diagnostic symptoms. Whilst the contribution of two symptoms (need for sleep; physical activity) to the model was more difficult to interpret, CHAID analysis indicated that four self-rated symptoms (sadness; feeling overwhelmed; impaired concentration; paranoia) offered the best discrimination between cases and non-cases. These four symptoms showed different associations with family history status.

Conclusions

The findings need replication in independent cohorts. However, the use of CHAID might provide a means of identifying specific subsets of trans-diagnostic symptoms representing clinical phenotypes that predict transition to caseness in individuals at risk of onset of major mental disorders.

SUBMITTER: Scott J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8177455 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe association between infertility treatments and mental disorders has been poorly addressed. This work aims to review current evidence on the psychopathological effects of hormonal treatments used for infertility on women and the occurrence of newly diagnosed mood and psychotic disorders.MethodsA systematic review was performed by searching PubMed and clinicaltrials.gov databases from inception until September 2019. Clinical trials on hormone treatments for infertility in patients with mood or psychotic disorders, as well as those evaluating the onset of symptoms, were included. Selected studies were published in English, Spanish, and Dutch language peer-reviewed journals. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. Observational studies and case reports were excluded. Effect sizes for changes in depressive symptoms were calculated with Hedges'g and Cohen's d confidence intervals. A meta-analysis was not performed due to the heterogeneity of hormonal compounds in protocols.ResultsFrom 1,281 retrieved records, nine trials were included; all of them were conducted in non-clinical populations. Four trials compared Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and GnRH antagonists, showing a better mood profile for hormonal protocols including antagonists in one trial. Two trials compared protocols using GnRH agonists/antagonists versus natural cycle protocols (without gonadotropin stimulation), with a better mood profile (less depressive symptoms) in those protocols without gonadotropin stimulation. Other studies compared long and short protocols of GnRH agonists (no differences); two GnRH agonists, buserelin, and goserelin (no differences); and two patterns of clomiphene vs placebo administration (no differences). None of the selected studies investigated the risk of relapse in women with a previous diagnosis of depressive or psychotic disorders. When exploring pre-post changes in depressive symptoms, effect sizes suggested mild mood worsenings for most protocols (effect sizes ? -0.4), with the following pattern (worse to better): GnRH agonist > GnRH antagonist > no gonadotropin stimulation.ConclusionsThis is the first systematic review exploring the psychopathological effects of hormonal infertility treatments. Our study suggests that protocols without gonadotropin stimulation show a better mood profile when compared to those using GnRH antagonists or GnRH agonists. Future studies need to include patients with major mood and psychotic disorders.

Project description:Anhedonia is central to multiple psychiatric disorders and causes substantial disability. A dimensional conceptualization posits that anhedonia severity is related to a transdiagnostic continuum of reward deficits in specific neural networks. Previous functional connectivity studies related to anhedonia have focused on case-control comparisons in specific disorders, using region-specific seed-based analyses. Here, the authors explore the entire functional connectome in relation to reward responsivity across a population of adults with heterogeneous psychopathology.In a sample of 225 adults from five diagnostic groups (major depressive disorder, N=32; bipolar disorder, N=50; schizophrenia, N=51; psychosis risk, N=39; and healthy control subjects, N=53), the authors conducted a connectome-wide analysis examining the relationship between a dimensional measure of reward responsivity (the reward sensitivity subscale of the Behavioral Activation Scale) and resting-state functional connectivity using multivariate distance-based matrix regression.The authors identified foci of dysconnectivity associated with reward responsivity in the nucleus accumbens, the default mode network, and the cingulo-opercular network. Follow-up analyses revealed dysconnectivity among specific large-scale functional networks and their connectivity with the nucleus accumbens. Reward deficits were associated with decreased connectivity between the nucleus accumbens and the default mode network and increased connectivity between the nucleus accumbens and the cingulo-opercular network. In addition, impaired reward responsivity was associated with default mode network hyperconnectivity and diminished connectivity between the default mode network and the cingulo-opercular network.These results emphasize the centrality of the nucleus accumbens in the pathophysiology of reward deficits and suggest that dissociable patterns of connectivity among large-scale networks are critical to the neurobiology of reward dysfunction across clinical diagnostic categories.

Project description:BackgroundDepression is the most prevalent mental health problem. The need for effective treatments for depression far outstrips the availability of trained mental health professionals. Smartphones and other widely available technologies are increasingly being leveraged to deliver treatments for depression. Whether there are patient characteristics that affect the potency of smartphone interventions for depression is not well understood.ObjectiveThis study aimed to evaluate whether patient characteristics including clinical diagnosis, depression severity, psychosis status, and current use of antidepressant medications impact the effects of an evidence-based smartphone intervention on depressive symptoms.MethodsData were collected as part of a 2-arm randomized controlled trial comparing a multimodal smartphone intervention called FOCUS with a clinic-based intervention. Here, we report on 82 participants assigned to 12 weeks of FOCUS treatment. We conducted assessments of depressive symptoms using the Beck Depression Inventory-second edition (BDI-II) at baseline, postintervention (3 months), and follow-up (6 months). We tested for differences in the amount of improvement in BDI-II scores from baseline to posttreatment and 6-month follow-up between each of the following patient subgroups using 2 (group) × 2 (time) mixed effects models: diagnosis (ie, schizophrenia spectrum disorder vs bipolar disorder vs major depressive disorder), depression severity (ie, minimal-mild vs moderate-severe depression), psychosis status (ie, presence vs absence of psychotic symptoms), and antidepressant use (ie, taking antidepressants vs not taking antidepressants).ResultsThe majority of participants were male (60%, 49/82), African American (65%, 53/82), and middle-aged (mean age 49 years), with a high school education or lower (62%, 51/82). There were no differences in patient demographics across the variables that were used to stratify the analyses. There was a significant group × time interaction for baseline depression severity (F1,76.8=5.26, P=.02 [posttreatment] and F1,77.4=6.56, P=.01 [6-month follow-up]). Participants with moderate or severe depression had significant improvements (t42=3.20, P=.003 [posttreatment] and t42=4.20, P<.001 [6-month follow-up]), but participants with minimal or mild depression did not (t31=0.20, P=.84 [posttreatment] and t30=0.43, P=.67 [6-month follow-up]). There were no significant group × time interactions for diagnosis, psychosis status, or antidepressant medication use. Participants with minimal or mild depression had negligible nonsignificant improvements (<1 point on the BDI-II). Reduction in depression in all other groups was larger (range 1.7-6.5 points on the BDI-II).ConclusionsOur results suggest that FOCUS can be deployed to treat moderate to severe depressive symptoms among people with schizophrenia spectrum disorders, bipolar disorder, and major depressive disorder, in concert with antidepressant medications or without them, in both people with and without active psychotic symptoms. The study results are consistent with research on transdiagnostic models in psychotherapy and extend our knowledge about the potential of transdiagnostic mobile health.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02421965; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02421965 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/76pyDlvAS).

Project description:Introduction: Although attenuated psychotic symptoms often occur for the first time during adolescence, studies focusing on adolescents are scarce. Attenuated psychotic symptoms form the criteria to identify individuals at increased clinical risk of developing psychosis. The study of individuals with these symptoms has led to the release of the DSM-5 diagnosis of Attenuated Psychosis Syndrome (APS) as a condition for further research. We aimed to characterize and compare hospitalized adolescents with DSM-5-APS diagnosis vs. hospitalized adolescents without a DSM-5-APS diagnosis. Methods: Interviewing help-seeking, hospitalized adolescents (aged 12-18 years) and their caregivers independently with established research instruments, we (1) evaluated the presence of APS among non-psychotic adolescents, (2) characterized and compared APS and non-APS individuals regarding sociodemographic, illness and intervention characteristics, (3) correlated psychopathology with levels of functioning and severity of illness and (4) investigated the influence of individual clinical, functional and comorbidity variables on the likelihood of participants to be diagnosed with APS. Results: Among 248 consecutively recruited adolescents (age=15.4 ± 1.5 years, females = 69.6%) with non-psychotic psychiatric disorders, 65 (26.2%) fulfilled APS criteria and 183 (73.8%) did not fulfill them. Adolescents with APS had higher number of psychiatric disorders than non-APS adolescents (3.5 vs. 2.4, p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.77), particularly, disruptive behavior disorders (Cramer's V = 0.16), personality disorder traits (Cramer's V = 0.26), anxiety disorders (Cramer's V = 0.15), and eating disorders (Cramer's V = 0.16). Adolescents with APS scored higher on positive (Cohen's d = 1.5), negative (Cohen's d = 0.55), disorganized (Cohen's d = 0.51), and general symptoms (Cohen's d = 0.84), and were more severely ill (Cohen's d = 1.0) and functionally impaired (Cohen's d = 0.31). Negative symptoms were associated with lower functional levels (Pearson ? = -0.17 to -0.20; p = 0.014 to 0.031). Global illness severity was associated with higher positive, negative, and general symptoms (Pearson ? = 0.22 to 0.46; p = 0.04 to p < 0.001). APS status was independently associated with perceptual abnormalities (OR = 2.0; 95% CI = 1.6-2.5, p < 0.001), number of psychiatric diagnoses (OR = 1.5; 95% CI = 1.2-2.0, p = 0.002), and impaired stress tolerance (OR = 1.4; 95% CI = 1.1-1.7, p = 0.002) (r 2 = 0.315, p < 0.001). Conclusions: A considerable number of adolescents hospitalized with non-psychotic psychiatric disorders meet DSM-5-APS criteria. These help-seeking adolescents have more comorbid disorders and more severe symptoms, functional impairment, and severity of illness than non-APS adolescents. Thus, they warrant high intensity clinical care.