Dataset Information

Transition to psychosis in randomized clinical trials of individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis compared to observational cohorts: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis (CHR-P) recruited in randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and observational cohorts may display a different enrichment and hence risk of transition to psychosis. No meta-analysis has ever addressed this issue.

Methods

"Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses" (PRISMA) and "Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology" (MOOSE)-compliant meta-analysis. PubMed and Web of Science were searched until November 2020 (PROSPERO:CRD42021229223). We included nonoverlapping longitudinal studies (RCTs-control condition and observational cohorts) reporting the transition to psychosis in CHR-P individuals. The primary effect size measure was the cumulative risk of transition at 0.5, 1, and 2 years follow-up in RCTs compared to observational cohorts. Random effects meta-analyses, heterogeneity assessment, quality assessment, and meta-regressions were conducted.

Results

Ninety-four independent studies (24 RCTs, 70 observational cohorts) and 9,243 individuals (mean age = 20.1 ± 3.0 years; 43.7% females) were included. The meta-analytical risk of transitioning to psychosis from a CHR-P stage was 0.091 (95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.068-0.121) at 0.5 years, 0.140 (95% CI = 0.101-0.191) at 1 year and 0.165 (95% CI = 0.097-0.267) at 2 years follow-up in RCTs, and 0.081 (95% CI = 0.067-0.099) at 0.5 years, 0.138 (95% CI = 0.114-0.167) at 1 year, and 0.174 (95% CI = 0.156-0.193) at 2 years follow-up in observational cohorts. There were no between-group differences in transition risks (p > 0.05). The proportion of CHR-P individuals with substance use disorders (excluding alcohol and cannabis) was higher in observational cohorts (16.8, 95% CI = 13.3-21.0%) than in RCTs (3.4, 95% CI = 0.8-12.7%; p = 0.018).

Conclusions

There is no meta-analytic evidence supporting sampling biases in RCTs of CHR-P individuals. Further RCTs are needed to detect effective interventions to prevent psychosis in this at-risk group.

SUBMITTER: Salazar de Pablo G

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8390336 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimsThe clinical outcomes of individuals at clinical high risk of psychosis (CHR-P) who do not transition to psychosis are heterogeneous and inconsistently reported. We aimed to comprehensively evaluate longitudinally a wide range of outcomes in CHR-P individuals not developing psychosis.Methods"Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses" and "Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology"-compliant meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42021229212) searching original CHR-P longitudinal studies in PubMed and Web of Science databases up to 01/11/2021. As primary analysis, we evaluated the following outcomes within CHR-P non-transitioning individuals: (a) change in the severity of attenuated psychotic symptoms (Hedge's g); (b) change in the severity of negative psychotic symptoms (Hedge's g); (c) change in the severity of depressive symptoms (Hedge's g); (d) change in the level of functioning (Hedge's g); (e) frequency of remission (at follow-up). As a secondary analysis, we compared these outcomes in those CHR-P individuals who did not transition vs. those who did transition to psychosis at follow-up. We conducted random-effects model meta-analyses, sensitivity analyses, heterogeneity analyses, meta-regressions and publication bias assessment. The risk of bias was assessed using a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS).ResultsTwenty-eight studies were included (2756 CHR-P individuals, mean age = 20.4, 45.5% females). The mean duration of follow-up of the included studies was of 30.7 months. Primary analysis: attenuated psychotic symptoms [Hedges' g = 1.410, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.002-1.818]; negative psychotic symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.683, 95% CI 0.371-0.995); depressive symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.844, 95% CI 0.371-1.317); and functioning (Hedges' g = 0.776, 95% CI 0.463-1.089) improved in CHR-P non-transitioning individuals; 48.7% remitted at follow-up (95% CI 39.3-58.2%). Secondary analysis: attenuated psychotic symptoms (Hedges' g = 0.706, 95% CI 0.091-1.322) and functioning (Hedges' g = 0.623, 95% CI 0.375-0.871) improved in CHR-P individuals not-transitioning compared to those transitioning to psychosis, but there were no differences in negative or depressive symptoms or frequency of remission (p > 0.05). Older age was associated with higher improvements of attenuated psychotic symptoms (β = 0.225, p = 0.012); publication years were associated with a higher improvement of functioning (β = -0.124, p = 0.0026); a lower proportion of Brief Limited Intermittent Psychotic Symptoms was associated with higher frequencies of remission (β = -0.054, p = 0.0085). There was no metaregression impact for study continent, the psychometric instrument used, the quality of the study or proportion of females. The NOS scores were 4.4 ± 0.9, ranging from 3 to 6, revealing the moderate quality of the included studies.ConclusionsClinical outcomes improve in CHR-P individuals not transitioning to psychosis but only less than half remit over time. Sustained clinical attention should be provided in the longer term to monitor these outcomes.

Project description:ImportanceEstimating the current likelihood of transitioning from a clinical high risk for psychosis (CHR-P) to psychosis holds paramount importance for preventive care and applied research.ObjectiveTo quantitatively examine the consistency and magnitude of transition risk to psychosis in individuals at CHR-P.Data sourcesPubMed and Web of Science databases until November 1, 2020. Manual search of references from previous articles.Study selectionLongitudinal studies reporting transition risks in individuals at CHR-P.Data extraction and synthesisMeta-analysis compliant with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) reporting guidelines; independent data extraction, manually and through digitalization of Kaplan-Meier curves.Main outcome and measuresPrimary effect size was cumulative risk of transition to psychosis at 0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 4, and more than 4 years' follow-up, estimated using the numbers of individuals at CHR-P transitioning to psychosis at each time point. These analyses were complemented by meta-analytical Kaplan-Meier curves and speed of transition to psychosis (hazard rate). Random-effects meta-analysis, between-study heterogeneity analysis, study quality assessment, and meta-regressions were conducted.ResultsA total of 130 studies and 9222 individuals at CHR-P were included. The mean (SD) age was 20.3 (4.4) years, and 5100 individuals (55.3%) were male. The cumulative transition risk was 0.09 (95% CI, 0.07-0.10; k = 37; n = 6485) at 0.5 years, 0.15 (95% CI, 0.13-0.16; k = 53; n = 7907) at 1 year, 0.20 (95% CI, 0.17-0.22; k = 30; n = 5488) at 1.5 years, 0.19 (95% CI, 0.17-0.22; k = 44; n = 7351) at 2 years, 0.25 (95% CI, 0.21-0.29; k = 19; n = 3114) at 2.5 years, 0.25 (95% CI, 0.22-0.29; k = 29; n = 4029) at 3 years, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.23-0.30; k = 16; n = 2926) at 4 years, and 0.28 (95% CI, 0.20-0.37; k = 14; n = 2301) at more than 4 years. The cumulative Kaplan-Meier transition risk was 0.08 (95% CI, 0.08-0.09; n = 4860) at 0.5 years, 0.14 (95% CI, 0.13-0.15; n = 3408) at 1 year, 0.17 (95% CI, 0.16-0.19; n = 2892) at 1.5 years, 0.20 (95% CI, 0.19-0.21; n = 2357) at 2 years, 0.25 (95% CI, 0.23-0.26; n = 1444) at 2.5 years, 0.27 (95% CI, 0.25-0.28; n = 1029) at 3 years, 0.28 (95% CI, 0.26-0.29; n = 808) at 3.5 years, 0.29 (95% CI, 0.27-0.30; n = 737) at 4 years, and 0.35 (95% CI, 0.32-0.38; n = 114) at 10 years. The hazard rate only plateaued at 4 years' follow-up. Meta-regressions showed that a lower proportion of female individuals (β = -0.02; 95% CI, -0.04 to -0.01) and a higher proportion of brief limited intermittent psychotic symptoms (β = 0.02; 95% CI, 0.01-0.03) were associated with an increase in transition risk. Heterogeneity across the studies was high (I2 range, 77.91% to 95.73%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this meta-analysis, 25% of individuals at CHR-P developed psychosis within 3 years. Transition risk continued increasing in the long term. Extended clinical monitoring and preventive care may be beneficial in this patient population.

Project description:IntroductionTo date, it is unclear what the clinical benefit of cement augmentation in fixation for trochanteric fractures is. The aim of this meta-analysis is to compare cement augmentation to no augmentation in fixation of trochanteric femur fractures in the elderly patients (>65 years) following low energy trauma.MethodsPubMed/Medline/Embase/CENTRAL/CINAHL were searched for both randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies comparing both treatments. Effect estimates were pooled across studies using random effects models. Subgroup analysis was performed stratified by study design (RCTs and observational studies). The primary outcome is overall complication rate. Secondary outcomes include re-operation rate, mortality, operation duration, hospital stay, general quality of life, radiologic measures and functional hip scores.ResultsA total of four RCT's (437 patients) and three observational studies (293 patients) were included. The effect estimates of RCTs were equal to those obtained from observational studies. Cement augmentation has a significantly lower overall complication rate (28.3% versus 47.2%) with an odds ratio (OR) of 0.3 (95%CI 0.1-0.7). The occurrence of device/fracture related complications was the largest contributing factor to this higher overall complication rate in the non-augmented group (19.9% versus 6.0%, OR 0.2, 95%CI 0.1-0.6). Cement augmentation also carries a lower risk for re-interventions (OR 0.2, 95%CI 0.1-0.7) and shortens the hospital stay with 2 days (95%CI -2.2 to -0.5 days). The mean operation time was 7 minutes longer in the augmented group (95%CI 1.3-12.9). Radiological scores (lag screw/blade sliding mean difference -3.1mm, 95%CI -4.6 to -1.7, varus deviation mean difference -6.15°, 95%CI; -7.4 to -4.9) and functional scores (standardized mean difference 0.31, 95%CI 0.0-0.6) were in favor of cement augmentation. Mortality was equal in both groups (OR 0.7, 95%CI 0.4-1.3) and cement related complications were rare.ConclusionCement augmentation in fixation of trochanteric femoral fractures leads to fewer complications, re-operations and shorter hospital stay at the expense of a slightly longer operation duration. Cementation related complications occur rarely and mortality is equal between treatment groups. Based on these results, cement augmentation should be considered for trochanteric fractures in elderly patients.

Project description:BackgroundThere have been ongoing efforts to understand when and how data from observational studies can be applied to clinical and regulatory decision making. The objective of this review was to assess the comparability of relative treatment effects of pharmaceuticals from observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs).MethodsWe searched PubMed and Embase for systematic literature reviews published between January 1, 1990, and January 31, 2020, that reported relative treatment effects of pharmaceuticals from both observational studies and RCTs. We extracted pooled relative effect estimates from observational studies and RCTs for each outcome, intervention-comparator, or indication assessed in the reviews. We calculated the ratio of the relative effect estimate from observational studies over that from RCTs, along with the corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) for each pair of pooled RCT and observational study estimates, and we evaluated the consistency in relative treatment effects.ResultsThirty systematic reviews across 7 therapeutic areas were identified from the literature. We analyzed 74 pairs of pooled relative effect estimates from RCTs and observational studies from 29 reviews. There was no statistically significant difference (based on the 95% CI) in relative effect estimates between RCTs and observational studies in 79.7% of pairs. There was an extreme difference (ratio < 0.7 or > 1.43) in 43.2% of pairs, and, in 17.6% of pairs, there was a significant difference and the estimates pointed in opposite directions.ConclusionsOverall, our review shows that while there is no significant difference in the relative risk ratios between the majority of RCTs and observational studies compared, there is significant variation in about 20% of comparisons. The source of this variation should be the subject of further inquiry to elucidate how much of the variation is due to differences in patient populations versus biased estimates arising from issues with study design or analytical/statistical methods.

Project description:ImportanceThere is evidence that sodium benzoate (BZ) may be an effective adjunctive treatment for schizophrenia. The clinical efficacy of BZ has been investigated in chronic schizophrenia; however, the efficacy of this agent has not been studied in individuals with early psychosis.ObjectiveTo examine the clinical efficacy of the adjunctive use of BZ for symptoms in people with early psychosis.Design, setting, and participantsUsing a placebo-controlled double-masked parallel-group design, this randomized clinical trial was conducted from August 2015 to July 2018. Participants aged between 15 and 45 years experiencing early psychosis were enrolled from 5 major clinical sites in Queensland, Australia. Data analysis was conducted from October 2018 to February 2020.InterventionsParticipants were randomized 1:1 (50 participants in each group) to receive 500 mg of sodium benzoate twice daily or placebo for 12 weeks.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary efficacy outcome was the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) total score at 12 weeks. The key secondary efficacy measures were (1) the Clinical Global Impression score, (2) the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale for depression, (3) functioning as assessed by the clinician-rated Global Assessment of Function, and (4) the Assessment of Quality of Life Scale. The PANSS subscale scores and impact on selected amino acid concentrations were also assessed.ResultsThe study comprised 100 participants with a mean (SD) age of 21.4 (4.1) years, of whom 73 (73%) were male individuals. The mean (SD) baseline PANSS score was 75.3 (15.4). We found no improvement in total PANSS score in the BZ group compared with the placebo group. The end result of least-squares mean difference (SE) for total PANSS was -1.2 (2.4) (P = .63). There were no differences in any subscales of the PANSS, any secondary measures, nor any amino acid concentrations. The dose of BZ was well tolerated without any clinically significant treatment-emergent adverse event differences between BZ and placebo groups.Conclusions and relevanceIn this randomized clinical trial, there was no evidence that adjunctive use of 500 mg of BZ twice daily is an effective treatment for individuals with early psychosis.Trial registrationanzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN12615000187549.

Project description:The objective of this study is to describe the 2-year real-world clinical outcomes after transition to psychosis in patients at clinical high-risk. The study used the clinical electronic health record cohort study including all patients receiving a first index primary diagnosis of nonorganic International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-10 psychotic disorder within the early psychosis pathway in the South London and Maudsley (SLaM) National Health Service (NHS) Trust from 2001 to 2017. Outcomes encompassed: cumulative probability (at 3, 6, 12, and 24 months) of receiving a first (1) treatment with antipsychotic, (2) informal admission, (3) compulsory admission, and (4) treatment with clozapine and (5) numbers of days spent in hospital (at 12 and 24 months) in patients transitioning to psychosis from clinical high-risk services (Outreach and Support in south London; OASIS) compared to other first-episode groups. Analyses included logistic and 0-inflated negative binomial regressions. In the study, 1561 patients were included; those who had initially been managed by OASIS and had subsequently transitioned to a first episode of psychosis (n = 130) were more likely to receive antipsychotic medication (at 3, 6, and 24 months; all P < .023), to be admitted informally (at all timepoints, all P < .004) and on a compulsory basis (at all timepoints, all P < .013), and to have spent more time in hospital (all timepoints, all P < .007) than first-episode patients who were already psychotic when seen by the OASIS service (n = 310), or presented to early intervention services (n = 1121). The likelihood of receiving clozapine was similar across all groups (at 12/24 months, all P < .101). Transition to psychosis from a clinical high-risk state is associated with severe real-world clinical outcomes. Prevention of transition to psychosis should remain a core target of future research. The study protocol was registered on www.researchregistry.com; researchregistry5039).

Project description:Meta-analytic evidence indicates that baseline exposure to antipsychotics (AP) in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis (CHR-P) is associated with an even higher risk of transition to psychosis. However, the temporal dynamics of such prognostic effect have not been clarified yet. This study was therefore designed to address this knowledge gap. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of all longitudinal studies published up to 31 December 2021 on CHR-P individuals identified according to a validated diagnostic procedure and reporting numeric data of transition to psychosis according to baseline antipsychotic exposure. 28 studies covering a total of 2405 CHR-P were included. 554 (23.0%) were exposed to AP at baseline, whereas 1851 (77.0%) were not. At follow-up (12 to 72 months), 182 individuals among AP-exposed (32.9%; 95% CI: 29.4% to 37.8%) and 382 among AP-naive CHR-P (20.6%; 18.8% to 22.8%) developed psychosis. Transition rates increased over time, with the best-fit for an ascending curve peaking at 24 months and reaching then a plateau, with a further increase at 48 months. Baseline AP-exposed CHR-P had higher transition risk at 12 months and then again at 36 and 48 months, with an overall higher risk of transition (fixed-effect model: risk ratio = 1.56 [95% CI: 1.32-1.85]; z = 5.32; p < 0.0001; Random-effect model: risk ratio = 1.56 [95% CI: 1.07-2.26]; z = 2.54; p = 0.0196). In conclusion, the temporal dynamics of transition to psychosis differ in AP-exposed vs. AP-naive CHR-P. Baseline AP exposure in CHR-P is associated with a persistently higher risk of transition at follow up, supporting the rationale for more stringent clinical monitoring in AP-exposed CHR-P. The insufficiency of more granular information in available primary literature (e.g., temporal and quantitative details of AP exposure as well as psychopathological dimensions in CHR-P) did not allow the testing of causal hypotheses on this negative prognostic association.

Project description:ImportanceObservational studies have reported an association between low serum vitamin D levels and elevated risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events, but such studies cannot prove causation because of possible unmeasured confounding.ObjectiveWe conducted a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials that tested the association of vitamin D supplementation with reduced CVD events and all-cause mortality.Data sourcesLiterature search through PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Embase was completed by 2 reviewers from each database's inception to December 15, 2018.Study selectionInclusion criteria were randomized clinical trials that reported the effect of long-term (≥1 year) vitamin D supplementation on CVD events and all-cause mortality. Studies that did not include cardiovascular outcomes were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisData were abstracted independently by 2 authors. Random-effects models were used to report the risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs.Main outcomes and measuresMajor adverse cardiovascular events was the primary outcome, and rates of myocardial infarction, stroke or cerebrovascular accident, CVD mortality, and all-cause mortality were the secondary end points.ResultsTwenty-one randomized clinical trials were included (including 83 291 patients, of whom 41 669 received vitamin D and 41 622 received placebos). The mean (SD) age of trial participants was 65.8 (8.4) years; 61 943 (74.4%) were female. Only 4 trials had prespecified CVD as a primary end point. Vitamin D supplementation compared with placebo was not associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.95-1.06]; P = .85) nor the secondary end points of myocardial infarction (RR, 1.00 [95% CI, 0.93-1.08]; P = .92), stroke (RR, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.98-1.15]; P = .16), CVD mortality (RR, 0.98 [95% CI, 0.90-1.07]; P = .68), or all-cause mortality (RR, 0.97 [95% CI, 0.93-1.02]; P = .23). Results were generally consistent by sex, baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D level, vitamin D dosage, formulation (daily vs bolus dosing), and presence or absence of concurrent calcium administration.Conclusions and relevanceIn this updated meta-analysis, vitamin D supplementation was not associated with reduced major adverse cardiovascular events, individual CVD end points (myocardial infarction, stroke, CVD mortality), or all-cause mortality. The findings suggest that vitamin D supplementation does not confer cardiovascular protection and is not indicated for this purpose.