Cargando…
Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation
Discriminating subjects at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis who will develop psychosis from those who will not is a prerequisite for preventive treatments. However, it is not yet possible to make any personalized prediction of psychosis onset relying only on the initial clinical baseline asses...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5605272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27535081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbw098 |
_version_ | 1783264958647107584 |
---|---|
author | Schmidt, André Cappucciati, Marco Radua, Joaquim Rutigliano, Grazia Rocchetti, Matteo Dell’Osso, Liliana Politi, Pierluigi Borgwardt, Stefan Reilly, Thomas Valmaggia, Lucia McGuire, Philip Fusar-Poli, Paolo |
author_facet | Schmidt, André Cappucciati, Marco Radua, Joaquim Rutigliano, Grazia Rocchetti, Matteo Dell’Osso, Liliana Politi, Pierluigi Borgwardt, Stefan Reilly, Thomas Valmaggia, Lucia McGuire, Philip Fusar-Poli, Paolo |
author_sort | Schmidt, André |
collection | PubMed |
description | Discriminating subjects at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis who will develop psychosis from those who will not is a prerequisite for preventive treatments. However, it is not yet possible to make any personalized prediction of psychosis onset relying only on the initial clinical baseline assessment. Here, we first present a systematic review of prognostic accuracy parameters of predictive modeling studies using clinical, biological, neurocognitive, environmental, and combinations of predictors. In a second step, we performed statistical simulations to test different probabilistic sequential 3-stage testing strategies aimed at improving prognostic accuracy on top of the clinical baseline assessment. The systematic review revealed that the best environmental predictive model yielded a modest positive predictive value (PPV) (63%). Conversely, the best predictive models in other domains (clinical, biological, neurocognitive, and combined models) yielded PPVs of above 82%. Using only data from validated models, 3-stage simulations showed that the highest PPV was achieved by sequentially using a combined (clinical + electroencephalography), then structural magnetic resonance imaging and then a blood markers model. Specifically, PPV was estimated to be 98% (number needed to treat, NNT = 2) for an individual with 3 positive sequential tests, 71%–82% (NNT = 3) with 2 positive tests, 12%–21% (NNT = 11–18) with 1 positive test, and 1% (NNT = 219) for an individual with no positive tests. This work suggests that sequentially testing CHR subjects with predictive models across multiple domains may substantially improve psychosis prediction following the initial CHR assessment. Multistage sequential testing may allow individual risk stratification of CHR individuals and optimize the prediction of psychosis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5605272 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56052722017-09-25 Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation Schmidt, André Cappucciati, Marco Radua, Joaquim Rutigliano, Grazia Rocchetti, Matteo Dell’Osso, Liliana Politi, Pierluigi Borgwardt, Stefan Reilly, Thomas Valmaggia, Lucia McGuire, Philip Fusar-Poli, Paolo Schizophr Bull Regular Article Discriminating subjects at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis who will develop psychosis from those who will not is a prerequisite for preventive treatments. However, it is not yet possible to make any personalized prediction of psychosis onset relying only on the initial clinical baseline assessment. Here, we first present a systematic review of prognostic accuracy parameters of predictive modeling studies using clinical, biological, neurocognitive, environmental, and combinations of predictors. In a second step, we performed statistical simulations to test different probabilistic sequential 3-stage testing strategies aimed at improving prognostic accuracy on top of the clinical baseline assessment. The systematic review revealed that the best environmental predictive model yielded a modest positive predictive value (PPV) (63%). Conversely, the best predictive models in other domains (clinical, biological, neurocognitive, and combined models) yielded PPVs of above 82%. Using only data from validated models, 3-stage simulations showed that the highest PPV was achieved by sequentially using a combined (clinical + electroencephalography), then structural magnetic resonance imaging and then a blood markers model. Specifically, PPV was estimated to be 98% (number needed to treat, NNT = 2) for an individual with 3 positive sequential tests, 71%–82% (NNT = 3) with 2 positive tests, 12%–21% (NNT = 11–18) with 1 positive test, and 1% (NNT = 219) for an individual with no positive tests. This work suggests that sequentially testing CHR subjects with predictive models across multiple domains may substantially improve psychosis prediction following the initial CHR assessment. Multistage sequential testing may allow individual risk stratification of CHR individuals and optimize the prediction of psychosis. Oxford University Press 2017-03 2016-08-17 /pmc/articles/PMC5605272/ /pubmed/27535081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbw098 Text en © The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits non-commercial re-use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. For commercial re-use, please contact journals.permissions@oup.com |
spellingShingle | Regular Article Schmidt, André Cappucciati, Marco Radua, Joaquim Rutigliano, Grazia Rocchetti, Matteo Dell’Osso, Liliana Politi, Pierluigi Borgwardt, Stefan Reilly, Thomas Valmaggia, Lucia McGuire, Philip Fusar-Poli, Paolo Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title | Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title_full | Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title_fullStr | Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title_full_unstemmed | Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title_short | Improving Prognostic Accuracy in Subjects at Clinical High Risk for Psychosis: Systematic Review of Predictive Models and Meta-analytical Sequential Testing Simulation |
title_sort | improving prognostic accuracy in subjects at clinical high risk for psychosis: systematic review of predictive models and meta-analytical sequential testing simulation |
topic | Regular Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5605272/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27535081 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbw098 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT schmidtandre improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT cappucciatimarco improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT raduajoaquim improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT rutiglianograzia improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT rocchettimatteo improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT dellossoliliana improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT politipierluigi improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT borgwardtstefan improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT reillythomas improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT valmaggialucia improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT mcguirephilip improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation AT fusarpolipaolo improvingprognosticaccuracyinsubjectsatclinicalhighriskforpsychosissystematicreviewofpredictivemodelsandmetaanalyticalsequentialtestingsimulation |