Shona M. Francey

Mapping the onset of psychosis: the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States

Objective: Recognizing the prodrome of a first psychotic episode prospectively creates the opportunity of intervention, which could delay, ameliorate or even prevent onset. Valid criteria and a reliable methodology for identifying possible prodromes are needed. This paper describes an instrument, the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), which has been designed for such a purpose. It has two functions: (i) to assess psychopathology thought to indicate imminent development of a first-episode psychotic disorder; and (ii) to determine if an individual meets criteria for being at ultra high risk (UHR) for onset of first psychotic disorder. This paper describes the pilot evaluation of the CAARMS.Method: Several methodologies were used to test the CAARMS. First, CAARMS scores in a group of UHR young people and the association between CAARMS scores and the risk of transition to psychotic disorder, were analysed. Second, CAARMS scores in a UHR group were compared to a control group. To asses...

Intervention in individuals at ultra high risk for psychosis : a review and future directions

OBJECTIVE Over the last 15 years, a focus on early intervention in psychotic disorders has emerged. Initially, the early psychosis movement focused on timely recognition and phase-specific treatment of first-episode psychosis. However, early psychosis researchers suspected that pushing the point of intervention even further back to the prodromal phase of psychotic disorders may result in even better outcomes. This article reviews intervention research in the ultra-high-risk phase of psychotic disorders. DATA SOURCES A literature search of intervention trials with ultra-high-risk cohorts published after 1980 was conducted on PubMed with the search terms prodrome and intervention. STUDY SELECTION All published intervention trials with ultra-high-risk cohorts. DATA SYNTHESIS The first generation of intervention trials indicated that both pharmacologic and psychological intervention strategies may be of value in terms of symptom reduction and delay or prevention of onset of threshold psychotic disorder. CONCLUSIONS Further controlled intervention trials with larger sample sizes are required in order to confirm and extend these findings. We argue that the clinical staging model provides a framework for the rationale and design of such studies, with simpler, safer, and more benign interventions being better candidates for first-line treatment, while more complex and potentially harmful treatments should be reserved for those cases in which response has failed to occur. Recent evidence indicates that neuroprotective agents, such as essential fatty acids, may be a suitable form of intervention for the ultra-high-risk phase of psychotic disorders, with a positive risk-benefit balance. Ethical aspects have become more salient given the recently observed declining transition rate in ultra-high-risk samples. We outline the key questions for the next generation of ultra-high-risk intervention trials.

Long-term Follow-up of a Group at Ultra High Risk (“Prodromal”) for Psychosis: The PACE 400 Study

IMPORTANCE The ultra high-risk (UHR) criteria were introduced to prospectively identify patients at high risk of psychotic disorder. Although the short-term outcome of UHR patients has been well researched, the long-term outcome is not known. OBJECTIVE To assess the rate and baseline predictors of transition to psychotic disorder in UHR patients up to 15 years after study entry. DESIGN Follow-up study of a cohort of UHR patients recruited to participate in research studies between 1993 and 2006. SETTING The Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) clinic, a specialized service for UHR patients in Melbourne, Australia. PARTICIPANTS Four hundred sixteen UHR patients previously seen at the PACE clinic. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Transition to psychotic disorder, as measured using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale/Comprehensive Assessment of Symptoms and History, or state public mental health records. RESULTS During the time to follow-up (2.4-14.9 years after presentation), 114 of the 416 participants were known to have developed a psychotic disorder. The highest risk for transition was within the first 2 years of entry into the service, but individuals continued to be at risk up to 10 years after initial referral. The overall rate of transition was estimated to be 34.9% over a 10-year period (95% CI, 28.7%-40.6%). Factors associated with transition included year of entry into the clinic, duration of symptoms before clinic entry, baseline functioning, negative symptoms, and disorders of thought content. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE The UHR patients are at long-term risk for psychotic disorder, with the highest risk in the first 2 years. Services should aim to follow up patients for at least this period, with the possibility to return for care after this time. Individuals with a long duration of symptoms and poor functioning at the time of referral may need closer monitoring. Interventions to improve functioning and detect help-seeking UHR patients earlier also may be indicated.

Experience of trauma and conversion to psychosis in an ultra-high-risk (prodromal) group.

Bechdolf A, Thompson A, Nelson B, Cotton S, Simmons MB, Amminger GP, Leicester S, Francey SM, McNab C, Krstev H, Sidis A, McGorry PD, Yung AR. Experience of trauma and conversion to psychosis in an ultra‐high‐risk (prodromal) group.

Medium term follow-up of a randomized controlled trial of interventions for young people at ultra high risk of psychosis

Valid criteria to identify young people who are believed to be at ultra high risk (UHR) of developing a psychotic episode were developed over the last decade. The first randomized controlled trial of treatment in a UHR cohort indicated that specific pharmacotherapy and psychotherapy delayed onset of disorder, and possibly reduced incidence. This paper reports results of follow-up of that trial. 41 of the 59 (69.5%) participants in the original study agreed to follow-up. No differences were found in transition rate, level of symptomatology or functioning between participants who received a combination of psychological treatment and anti-psychotic medication compared to those who received supportive therapy alone. A significant proportion of both treatment groups reported moderate levels of psychiatric morbidity and a continuing need and desire for care at this follow-up. Low levels of hospitalisation were noted for those who did progress to psychosis. Conclusions that can be drawn from this exploratory study are limited by the relatively small number of participants in the original study and the failure to follow-up the entire cohort. Although participants may have been treated too briefly to result in enduring positive effects, there appear to have been some cost savings in inpatient mental health treatment required after the end of the trial for individuals in both treatment groups who developed psychosis.

Mapping the onset of psychosis: The comprehensive assessment of at risk mental states (CAARMS)

OBJECTIVE Recognizing the prodrome of a first psychotic episode prospectively creates the opportunity of intervention, which could delay, ameliorate or even prevent onset. Valid criteria and a reliable methodology for identifying possible prodromes are needed. This paper describes an instrument, the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (CAARMS), which has been designed for such a purpose. It has two functions: (i) to assess psychopathology thought to indicate imminent development of a first-episode psychotic disorder; and (ii) to determine if an individual meets criteria for being at ultra high risk (UHR) for onset of first psychotic disorder. This paper describes the pilot evaluation of the CAARMS. METHOD Several methodologies were used to test the CAARMS. First, CAARMS scores in a group of UHR young people and the association between CAARMS scores and the risk of transition to psychotic disorder, were analysed. Second, CAARMS scores in a UHR group were compared to a control group. To assess concurrent validity, CAARMS-defined UHR criteria were compared to the existing criteria for identifying the UHR cohort. To assess predictive validity, the CAARMS-defined UHR criteria were applied to a sample of 150 non-psychotic help-seekers and rates of onset of psychotic disorder at 6-month follow-up determined for the CAARMS-positive (i.e. met UHR criteria) group and the CAARMS-negative (i.e. did not meet UHR criteria) group. The inter-rater reliability of the CAARMS was assessed by using pairs of raters. RESULTS High CAARMS score in the UHR group was significantly associated with onset of psychotic disorder. The control group had significantly lower CAARMS scores than the UHR group. The UHR criteria assessed by the CAARMS identified a similar group to the criteria measured by existing methodology. In the sample of non-psychotic help-seekers those who were CAARMS-positive were at significantly increased risk of onset of psychotic disorder compared to those who were CAARMS-negative (relative risk of 12.44 (95% CI = 1.5-103.41, p = 0.0025)). The CAARMS had good to excellent reliability. CONCLUSIONS In these preliminary investigations, the CAARMS displayed good to excellent concurrent, discriminant and predictive validity and excellent inter-rater reliability. The CAARMS instrument provides a useful platform for monitoring subthreshold psychotic symptoms for worsening into full-threshold psychotic disorder.

Who needs antipsychotic medication in the earliest stages of psychosis? A reconsideration of benefits, risks, neurobiology and ethics in the era of early intervention

In recent years, early intervention services have attempted to identify people with a first episode of psychosis as early as possible, reducing the duration of untreated psychosis and changing the timing of delivery of interventions. The logic of early intervention is based partly on accessing people in a more treatment responsive stage of illness in which psychosocial damage is less extensive, and partly on remediating a putatively active process of neuroprogression that leads to pathophysiological, symptomatic and structural changes, hence improving symptomatic and functional outcomes. However, as in other areas of health care, earlier identification of new patients may mean that different treatment approaches are indicated. The corollary of early detection is that the sequence and complexion of treatment strategies for first episode psychosis has been revaluated. Examples include the minimal effective dosage of antipsychotic medication and the content of psychosocial interventions. With the substantial reductions of DUP now seen in many early psychosis services, based on clinical staging and stepped care principles, it is even possible that the immediate introduction of antipsychotic medication may not be necessary for all first episode psychosis cases, but that potentially safer interventions, which may be more acceptable to many patients, such as comprehensive psychosocial intervention, may constitute effective treatment at least for a subgroup of patients. In this paper, we review this theoretical background and describe a randomised controlled trial currently underway at the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Melbourne designed to test outcomes for first episode psychosis patients in response to two different treatments: intensive psychosocial intervention plus antipsychotic medication versus intensive psychosocial intervention plus placebo. This is a theoretically and pragmatically novel study in that it will provide evidence as to whether intensive psychosocial intervention alone is sufficient for a subgroup of first episode psychosis patients in a specialised early intervention service, and provide a test of the heuristic clinical staging model. By experimentally manipulating duration of untreated psychosis, the study will also provide a methodologically strong test of the effect of delaying the introduction of antipsychotic medication, as well as helping to disentangle the effects of antipsychotic medications and the putative neurobiological processes associated with brain changes and symptom profiles in the early phase of psychotic disorders. The study has been carefully crafted to satisfy critical ethical demands in this challenging research domain.

Early-onset of symptoms predicts conversion to non-affective psychosis in ultra-high risk individuals

OBJECTIVE We examined if age of onset of psychiatric symptoms and/or sex predict conversion to non-affective or affective psychosis in individuals considered to be at ultra-high risk for schizophrenia. METHOD Participants (n=86) were offered treatment and monthly follow-up until transition to psychosis, or for 12 months if they did not meet exit criteria for psychotic disorder. Individuals without transition to psychosis at 12-month were reassessed approximately 3 years after the end of the treatment phase. Ultra-high risk was defined by the presence of subthreshold and/or self-limiting psychotic symptoms and/or having a family history of psychotic disorder combined with functional decline. Cox regressions after adjustment for treatment interventions were applied to investigate associations between age of onset, sex, and other baseline measures with progression to psychotic outcomes. RESULTS Early age of onset of psychiatric symptoms, in particular onset before age 18 was the only tested variable that significantly predicted non-affective psychosis. Independent significant predictors of affective psychosis were poor functioning, female sex and the presence of a combination of intake criteria (family history of psychosis plus drop in functioning, and attenuated and/or brief limited psychotic symptoms) at baseline. CONCLUSIONS Age of onset of psychiatric symptoms is the single most important factor associated with conversion to non-affective psychosis in ultra-high risk individuals.

Can we predict the onset of first-episode psychosis in a high-risk group?

Treating individuals in the prodromal phase preceding a first psychotic episode has long been a goal of clinicians, the aim being to prevent or minimize the harm inflicted by a psychosis. Before embarking on such a preventive approach, it is first necessary to characterize the features of impending psychosis. We have defined a set of criteria, based on various state and trait risk factors, to identify subjects likely to undergo transition to psychosis within a short time. We prospectively followed up 23 subjects fulfilling these criteria. Subjects were assessed monthly on measures of psychopathology for 12 months. Eleven of the 23 subjects (48 %) made the transition to frank psychosis in the study period; the majority developed schizophrenia-like psychoses. Aberrant results on measures of psychopathology were found before the onset of psychosis. Our results indicate that it is possible to identify individuals who have a high likelihood of onset of psychosis within a brief follow-up period and that there are detectable mental state changes in this group prior to onset of psychosis. This finding lays the foundation for early treatment in an attempt to prevent, delay or minimize the severity of first psychotic episodes.

J Clin Psychiatry/Randomized Controlled Trial of Interventions for Young People at Ultra-High Risk of Psychosis: Twelve-Month Outcome

OBJECTIVE The ultra-high risk clinical phenotype is associated with substantial distress and functional impairment and confers a greatly enhanced risk for transition to full-threshold psychosis. A range of interventions aimed at relieving current symptoms and functional impairment and reducing the risk of transition to psychosis has shown promising results, but the optimal type and sequence of intervention remain to be established. The aim of this study was to determine which intervention was most effective at preventing transition to psychosis: cognitive therapy plus low-dose risperidone, cognitive therapy plus placebo, or supportive therapy plus placebo. METHOD A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 12-month trial of low-dose risperidone, cognitive therapy, or supportive therapy was conducted in a cohort of 115 clients of the Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation Clinic, a specialized service for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis located in Melbourne, Australia. Recruitment commenced in August 2000 and ended in May 2006. The primary outcome measure was transition to full-threshold psychosis, defined a priori as frank psychotic symptoms occurring at least daily for 1 week or more and assessed using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States. Secondary outcome measures were psychiatric symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life. RESULTS The estimated 12-month transition rates were as follows: cognitive therapy + risperidone, 10.7%; cognitive therapy + placebo, 9.6%; and supportive therapy + placebo, 21.8%. While there were no statistically significant differences between the 3 groups in transition rates (log-rank test P = .60), all 3 groups improved substantially during the trial, particularly in terms of negative symptoms and overall functioning. CONCLUSIONS The lower than expected, essentially equivalent transition rates in all 3 groups fail to provide support for the first-line use of antipsychotic medications in patients at ultra-high risk of psychosis, and an initial approach with supportive therapy is likely to be effective and carries fewer risks.