Objective
Treatment resistance complicates the management of schizophrenia. Research and clinical translation is limited by inconsistent definitions. To address this we evaluated current approaches and then developed consensus criteria and guidelines.
Method
A systematic review of randomized antipsychotic clinical trials in treatment resistant schizophrenia was performed. Definitions of treatment resistance were extracted. Subsequently, consensus operationalized criteria were developed by a working group of researchers and clinicians through i) a multi-phase, mixed methods approach; ii) identifying key criteria via an online survey; and iii) meetings to achieve consensus.
Results
42 studies met inclusion criteria. Of these, 21 (50%) studies did not provide operationalized criteria, whilst in others, criteria varied considerably, particularly regarding symptom severity, prior treatment duration and antipsychotic dose thresholds. Important for the inability to compare results, only two (5%) studies utilized the same criteria. The consensus group identified minimum and optimal criteria, employing the following principles: 1) current symptoms of a minimum duration and severity determined by a standardized rating scale; 2) ≥moderate functional impairment; 3) prior treatment consisting of ≥2 different antipsychotic trials, each for a minimum duration and dose; 4) adherence systematically assessed and meeting minimum criteria; 5) ideally at least one prospective treatment trial; 6) criteria that clearly separated responsive from treatment resistant patients.
Conclusions
There is considerable variation in current approaches to defining treatment resistance in schizophrenia. We present consensus guidelines that operationalize criteria for determining and reporting treatment resistance, adequate treatment and treatment response in schizophrenia, providing a benchmark for research and clinical translation.
When nonpharmacological strategies alone are insufficient, and switching antipsychotics to relatively weight-neutral agents is not feasible, the literature supports the use of concomitant metformin as first choice among pharmacological interventions to counteract antipsychotic-induced weight gain and other metabolic adversities in schizophrenia.
Background: Adherence has recently been suggested to be divided into these two components: persistence (i.e., whether patients continue treatment or not) and compliance (i.e., whether patients take doses as instructed). However, no study has yet assessed these two clinically relevant components at the same time in adherence to antidepressant treatment in the clinical outpatient setting.
Hypofunction of N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA) receptors has been proposed to have an important role in the cognitive impairments observed in schizophrenia. Although glutamate modulators may be effective in reversing such difficult-to-treat conditions, the results of individual studies thus far have been inconsistent. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine whether glutamate positive modulators have beneficial effects on cognitive functions in patients with schizophrenia. A literature search was conducted to identify double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trials in schizophrenia or related disorders, using Embase, Medline, and PsycINFO (last search: February 2015). The effects of glutamate positive modulators on cognitive deficits were evaluated for overall cognitive function and eight cognitive domains by calculating standardized mean differences (SMDs) between active drugs and placebo added to antipsychotics. Seventeen studies (N = 1391) were included. Glutamate positive modulators were not superior to placebo in terms of overall cognitive function (SMD = 0.08, 95% confidence interval = − 0.06 to 0.23) (11 studies, n = 858) nor each of eight cognitive domains (SMDs = − 0.03 to 0.11) (n = 367-940) in this population. Subgroup analyses by diagnosis (schizophrenia only studies), concomitant antipsychotics, or pathway of drugs to enhance the glutamatergic neurotransmission (glycine allosteric site of NMDA receptors or α-amino-3-hydroxy-5-methyl-4-isoxazolepropionic acid receptors) suggested no procognitive effect of glutamate positive modulators. Further, no effect was found in individual compounds on cognition. In conclusion, glutamate positive modulators may not be effective in reversing overall cognitive impairments in patients with schizophrenia as adjunctive therapies.
Genetic and epigenetic analyses may be useful as an additional diagnostic tool to distinguish between melanoma and Spitz naevus, and may help to define subgroups in atypical Spitz tumours.
Positron emission tomography (PET) studies proposed a therapeutic window of D2 receptor occupancy (65%-80%) of antipsychotics for the treatment of schizophrenia in young adults. However, this conclusion has been drawn from clinical PET studies using small sample sizes (<20). Prospective PET studies that measured D2 occupancy levels and assessed extrapyramidal side effects (EPS) and/or treatment response induced by antipsychotics (excluding partial agonists) were identified, using MEDLINE and EMBASE (last search: March 2010). Individual subjects were divided into 2 groups based on EPS status (ie, presence or lack of newly emergent EPS) and treatment response (ie, a ≥ 25% or ≥ 50% reduction in the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale or Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale). To evaluate the performance of this binary classification, sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of consecutive cutoff points in the D2 occupancy were calculated: Accuracy = (True Positive + True Negative) / Total N. Twelve studies, including a total of 82 subjects, were included in our analyses. The cutoff points associated with 0.5 or greater in both sensitivity and specificity with the greatest accuracy were 77% to 78% for EPS, 60% for a 25% or greater symptom reduction, and 72% for a 50% or greater symptom reduction. These findings support the presence of a therapeutic window of 60% to 78% D2 occupancy of antipsychotics in young adults with schizophrenia and may suggest the presence of a continuum of effectiveness with increasing occupancy within this therapeutic window.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.