The relation of antipsychotic and antidepressant medication with baseline symptoms and symptom progression: A naturalistic study of the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Sample
Introduction
Research has demonstrated that the onset of psychosis is typically preceded by a period of subclinical symptoms. This is referred to as the prodrome, with duration varying from one to six years (Cannon et al., 2008, Thomas and Woods, 2006). The onset of the prodrome is usually in the young adult period, and is characterized by behavioral dysfunction and subpsychotic symptoms that gradually increase in severity (Cannon, 2008, Sun et al., 2009, Walker, 2002). Interest in the prodrome has escalated recently in response to evidence that longer durations of untreated psychosis are associated with poorer prognosis. Thus, identifying individuals at risk for psychosis has the potential to hasten the provision of treatment if a psychotic episode occurs.
Several groups have developed structured interviews for assessing prodromal symptoms, and have significantly advanced the prediction of psychosis. Using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), researchers in Australia have conducted studies on prodromal individuals and initially reported that, within two years, 30 to 40% meet diagnostic criteria for a psychotic disorder (Yung and McGorry, 1996). In a more recent cohort from this project, a 2-year conversion rate of 16% was reported (Yung et al., 2008). It is suggested that this may reflect earlier detection of high risk individuals and/or greater provision or effectiveness of interventions in recent cohorts. Klosterkotter et al. (2001), in Germany, used another measure of prodromal symptoms, the Bonn Scale for the Assessment of Basic Symptoms (BSABS), to identify 110 prodromal patients who were followed for an average of 9.6 years. Of those with at least one prodromal symptom, 70% subsequently developed schizophrenia (within 4.3 years among women and after 6.7 years in men). In the US., McGlashan et al. (2006) developed the Structured Interview for Prodromal Syndromes (SIPS), as well as a severity scale, the Scale of Prodromal Symptoms (SOPS), and found that about 30% of individuals who meet criteria for attenuated positive symptoms manifest a psychotic disorder within 2 years (Miller et al., 2002). Most recently, a consortium has pooled data from prodromal studies conducted at eight sites, all using the SIPS. The sites comprising the North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS) ascertained clinical high-risk (CRH) individuals and followed them at regular intervals for up to 2 and 1/2 years (Addington et al., 2007). Approximately 35% of these subjects converted to psychosis over the 2 and ½ year period (Cannon et al., 2008).
A pivotal issue currently under discussion in the field is whether preventive intervention, especially antipsychotics, might be effective in delaying or reducing the onset of psychosis in prodromal individuals. Investigators have debated the potential benefits and risks in administering psychotropics to youth at risk for psychosis based on prodromal signs. Since 2000, several reports have been published on the effects of antipsychotics on prodromal symptoms and conversion to psychosis. The first, conducted by McGorry et al. (2002), in Australia, randomized prodromal patients to either usual care (n = 28) or open-label risperidone plus cognitive therapy and usual care (n = 31) for six months. Six month conversion to psychosis rates were 10% for the risperidone and therapy treatment versus 36% for usual care (p < .05), suggesting that the medication and cognitive therapy delayed onset of disorder, and possibly reduced incidence. In a follow-up of this sample 3–4 years later, however, there were no group differences in conversion or on any symptom measures (Phillips et al., 2007). A second study by the Yale group randomly assigned 60 prodromal youth to olanzapine or to placebo, with all receiving supportive psychotherapy (McGlashan et al., 2006, Woods et al., 2003). After one year, 16% of olanzapine-treated patients vs. 38% of placebo-treated patients had become psychotic. All of the conversions in the olanzapine group took place within the first month, while conversion continued beyond this period in the placebo group, suggesting a latency to the antipsychotic effect or doses that were too low. Treatment effects on symptoms were evident by eight weeks, with olanzapine producing greater symptom reductions, particularly in positive symptoms, than placebo. There was, however, significantly greater weight gain and fatigue among the olanzapine patients. In a treatment study from the German group, described above, prodromal individuals were randomly assigned to a needs-focused intervention without (n = 59) or with amisulpride (n = 65) (Ruhrmann et al., 2007). After 12 weeks, amisulpride plus the needs-focused intervention produced a greater reduction in symptoms, especially positive symptoms, as well as depression and functioning deficits. Although prolactin levels were higher with amisulpride, only a small number developed clinical elevations. Finally, in a nonrandomized clinical trial of risperidone with a small sample of youth yielded similar results, with greater reductions in positive prodromal symptoms (Cannon et al., 2002).
Subsequently, the Yale team completed an open-label, trial of aripiprazole in fifteen young prodromal patients (mean age 17.1 years) (Woods et al., 2007). The principal outcome was the reduction in the SOPS total score after 8 weeks. Improvement from baseline on the SOPS scores was statistically significant by the first week. Thirteen of 15 subjects (87%) completed the planned eight weeks of treatment. Weight gain averaged 1.2 kg over 8 weeks, and akathisia emerged in 8 of 15 patients, but mean akathisia ratings fell to baseline levels by the final visit. Adverse events were otherwise minimal. In summary, the findings from trials of antipsychotics with prodromal patients suggest conservative optimism about the potential benefits with respect to symptom reduction in the short term, but the findings are inconsistent with regard to prevention or delay of psychosis onset.
A recently reported naturalistic study indicates that antidepressants may also benefit clinical high risk youth (Cornblatt et al., 2007). The researchers examined non-randomly prescribed antidepressants (N = 20) and second-generation antipsychotics (N = 28). The two medication groups did not differ in baseline symptom profiles, with the exception of disorganized thinking, which was more severe in the second-generation antipsychotic group. Improvement in 3 of 5 positive symptoms over time was significant and similar for both medications. Disorganized thought, however, did not improve with either medication. Twelve of the 48 developed a psychotic disorder, with all converters having been on antipsychotics, and none on antidepressants. However, treatment outcome was confounded with medication adherence, in that 11 of the 12 converters were nonadherent, and participants were more likely to be nonadherent to second-generation antipsychotics than to antidepressants.
It should be noted that a randomized controlled trial of cognitive therapy (CT) was recently reported on a sample of prodromal subjects identified with the CAARMS (French et al., 2007, Morrison et al., 2007). Participants received either CT (n = 35) or monitoring (n = 23) over a 6 month period and 47% were followed up over a 3-year period. Within the first year, CT was associated with a greater reduction in positive symptoms (French et al., 2007). At the 3-year follow-up, CT significantly reduced the likelihood of being prescribed antipsychotic medication, but it did not affect transition to psychosis. Thus, to date, the limited findings on CT are similar to those on antipsychotic medication in showing reductions in positive symptom severity, but limited effect on conversion to psychosis.
In light of these findings, it is clear that additional research is needed on the relation between psychotropic medications and prodromal symptom progression. The NAPLS data set offers a unique opportunity for naturalistic investigations of this issue with a large sample. In this study, we examine the progression of prodromal symptoms in relation with the two most commonly prescribed classes of psychotropic medications: antipsychotics and antidepressants (SSRIs). Data on symptoms and medication status were collected at both baseline and follow-up. Based on past reports, it is predicted that prodromal patients on antipsychotics will show a more pronounced reduction in prodromal positive symptoms over time.
Section snippets
Sample and assessment procedures
A total of 191 patients, recruited between 1999 and 2004, who met at-risk or “prodromal” criteria, as defined by the SOPS, were the subjects of this study. None had any history of Axis I psychotic disorder. Demographics at baseline are listed in Table 1. Distribution by race is 80% white, 8% African American, 4.5% Asian, 5% multiracial and 3% unidentified.
This sample is a subgroup from the NAPLS project described above. Although originally independent studies, the NAPLS sites employed similar
Demographic and clinical characteristics
Analyses conducted to test the relation of demographic factors with symptoms showed only one significant sex difference, with males scoring higher on negative symptoms at baseline, t(1,188) = 3.59, p < .001, and follow-up, t(1,188 ) = 2.55, p < .05.
Mean symptom ratings by medication status are listed in Table 3. GLM analysis of positive symptoms yielded a significant main effect for Time (F(1,164) = 70.36, p < .001), reflecting the reduction across groups in rated severity of positive symptoms over time,
Discussion
The present study utilized a database of prodromal patients to examine the relation of symptom progression with atypical antipsychotics, SSRIs and other antidepressant medications. The findings are generally consistent with reports from previous controlled studies of the effects of antipsychotics on prodromal symptoms.
It is important to note that, independent of medication, we find a generalized trend toward a reduction in symptom severity ratings within the 6-month period between baseline and
Role of funding source
Funding/Support: This study was supported by investigator-initiated grants from the NIMH and a gift from the Staglin Music Festival for Mental Health.
Contributors
All authors contributed to and have approved the final manuscript.
Conflict of Interest
Dr. Addington reports that she currently or in the past 12 months has received investigator-initiated research funding support from multiple not-for-profit entities including the National Institute for Mental Health. Dr. Cadenhead reports that she currently or in the past 12 months has received investigator-initiated research funding support from the National Institute for Mental Health. Dr. Cannon reports that he currently or in the past 12 months has received investigator-initiated research
Acknowledgements
The North American Prodromal Longitudinal Study (NAPLs) is a collaboration among investigators from eight research sites that have focused on the prodrome to psychosis. We thank Joy Brasfield who assisted in the preparation of this manuscript for the NAPLs consortium.
References (22)
Neurodevelopment and the transition from prodrome to schizophrenia: research imperatives
Biol. Psychiatry
(2008)- et al.
Medium term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of interventions for young people at ultra high risk of psychosis
Schizophr. Res.
(2007) - et al.
Brain structural change during the development of psychosis: a longitudinal MRI study
Schizophr. Res.
(2009) - et al.
The schizophrenia prodrome: a developmentally informed review and update for psychopharmacologic treatment
Child Adolesc. Psychiatr. Clin. N. Am.
(2006) - et al.
Randomized trial of olanzapine versus placebo in the symptomatic acute treatment of the schizophrenic prodrome
Biol. Psychiatry
(2003) - et al.
Validation of “prodromal” criteria to detect individuals at ultra high risk of psychosis: 2 year follow-up
Schizophr. Res.
(2008) - et al.
North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study: a collaborative multisite approach to prodromal schizophrenia research
Schizophr. Bull.
(2007) - American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. 4th ed. Text revision...
- et al.
Antipsychotic drug treatment in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia
Am. J. Psychiatry
(2002) - et al.
Prediction of psychosis in youth at high clinical risk: a multisite longitudinal study in North America
Arch. Gen. Psychiatry
(2008)
Can antidepressants be used to treat the schizophrenia prodrome? Results of a prospective, naturalistic treatment study of adolescents
J. Clin. Psychiatry
Cited by (56)
Has improved treatment contributed to the declining rate of transition to psychosis in ultra-high-risk cohorts?
2022, Schizophrenia ResearchCitation Excerpt :There is evidence that specific aspects of CBT, notably case formulation and setting of homework tasks, are associated with greater treatment efficacy in UHR patients and therefore may have had a particularly strong impact on improved clinical outcomes if incorporated into standard practice (Flach et al., 2015). The use of medications, such as benzodiazepines, antidepressants, and antipsychotics, has been associated with reduced psychotic symptomatology in UHR individuals (Bowie et al., 2012; Cornblatt et al., 2007; Preti and Cella, 2010; Walker et al., 2009). Additionally, due to a shift in symptom mix at entry to UHR services over the years, with reducing severity of APS and increasing rates of mood disorders (Hartmann et al., 2016; Wiltink et al., 2015), medication prescription may have changed over time.
Pharmacological intervention for people at risk of psychotic disorder
2020, Risk Factors for Psychosis: Paradigms, Mechanisms, and PreventionRevisiting the therapeutic effect of rTMS on negative symptoms in schizophrenia: A meta-analysis
2014, Psychiatry Research