Cargando…

O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE

BACKGROUND: Psychotic disorders are characterized by large heterogeneity in clinical presentation, response to treatment and cognitive functioning. Indeed, there is evidence of the presence of cognitive subgroups of patients across affective and non-affective psychosis. However, very little is known...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Russo, Manuela, Ciufolini, Simone, Ajnakina, Olesya, Marques, Tiago Reis, Reichenberg, Avi, David, Anthony, Di Forti, Marta, Pariante, Carmine, Murray, Robin, Dazzan, Paola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5887961/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby015.243
_version_ 1783312423700135936
author Russo, Manuela
Ciufolini, Simone
Ajnakina, Olesya
Marques, Tiago Reis
Reichenberg, Avi
David, Anthony
Di Forti, Marta
Pariante, Carmine
Murray, Robin
Dazzan, Paola
author_facet Russo, Manuela
Ciufolini, Simone
Ajnakina, Olesya
Marques, Tiago Reis
Reichenberg, Avi
David, Anthony
Di Forti, Marta
Pariante, Carmine
Murray, Robin
Dazzan, Paola
author_sort Russo, Manuela
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Psychotic disorders are characterized by large heterogeneity in clinical presentation, response to treatment and cognitive functioning. Indeed, there is evidence of the presence of cognitive subgroups of patients across affective and non-affective psychosis. However, very little is known about these subgroups in first episode psychosis (FEP) and whether they can be informative about course of illness, particularly response to treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the number and the pattern of cognitive clusters in FEP, their external validity and association with treatment response at 12-week and 1-year follow up. METHODS: The sample was composed by a total of 212 participants including 105 FEP patients from the South London and Maudsley Foundation Trust and 107 Healthy Controls (HC). All participants underwent a comprehensive clinical and neurocognitive battery. Z-score [mean=0, and standard deviation (SD)=1] were created for the whole sample based on the neurocognitive performance of the HCs. Treatment response at 12-week and 1-year follow-up was used to explore potential utility of subtypes in predicting response to treatment. Hierarchical cluster analysis was carried out to determine the number of cognitive clusters in FEP patients. A series of analyses of variance were carried out to determine if FEP clusters differed among each other in relation to demographic and clinical characteristics, level of functioning and from the HC sample in term of cognitive performance. Logistic regression was used to explore whether cognitive clustering was predictive of treatment response at 12-week and 1-year FU. RESULTS: Four cognitive clusters emerged: one with near normal cognition (42.9% of the FEP patients) with a general cognitive score of z=-0.20, one with selected cognitive deficits (14.3%) in the domains of verbal memory, processing speed and executive functions (general cognitive score of z=-0.55); and two severe deficit clusters consisting in one cluster with severe deficits (33.3%; general score of z=-1.48) and the other with a deeply compromised cognitive ability (9.55%; general cognitive score of z=-2.34). There were no significant differences between clusters in terms of clinical features at baseline (including diagnosis, positive and negative symptoms, medication), apart from the level of functioning that was significantly lower in the severely compromised cluster compared to the near normal cognition cluster. It emerged that majority (about 68%) of the patients from the near normal cognition cluster were responsive to treatment, whilst the majority of the selective and severely impaired clusters did not respond to treatment at 12-week follow-up. There were no significant results with regard to treatment response at 1-year FU. DISCUSSION: Distinct patterns of cognitive impairments exist within FEP that might be characterized by different response to treatment. Clinical presentation at the onset of the illness is not useful in predicting response to treatment later on in the course of the illness, while cognitive functioning might be a more valid indicator. Cognitive stratification could represent a promising way forward to elucidate pathophysiology of psychosis and to provide tailored interventions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5887961
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58879612018-04-11 O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE Russo, Manuela Ciufolini, Simone Ajnakina, Olesya Marques, Tiago Reis Reichenberg, Avi David, Anthony Di Forti, Marta Pariante, Carmine Murray, Robin Dazzan, Paola Schizophr Bull Abstracts BACKGROUND: Psychotic disorders are characterized by large heterogeneity in clinical presentation, response to treatment and cognitive functioning. Indeed, there is evidence of the presence of cognitive subgroups of patients across affective and non-affective psychosis. However, very little is known about these subgroups in first episode psychosis (FEP) and whether they can be informative about course of illness, particularly response to treatment. The aim of this study is to investigate the number and the pattern of cognitive clusters in FEP, their external validity and association with treatment response at 12-week and 1-year follow up. METHODS: The sample was composed by a total of 212 participants including 105 FEP patients from the South London and Maudsley Foundation Trust and 107 Healthy Controls (HC). All participants underwent a comprehensive clinical and neurocognitive battery. Z-score [mean=0, and standard deviation (SD)=1] were created for the whole sample based on the neurocognitive performance of the HCs. Treatment response at 12-week and 1-year follow-up was used to explore potential utility of subtypes in predicting response to treatment. Hierarchical cluster analysis was carried out to determine the number of cognitive clusters in FEP patients. A series of analyses of variance were carried out to determine if FEP clusters differed among each other in relation to demographic and clinical characteristics, level of functioning and from the HC sample in term of cognitive performance. Logistic regression was used to explore whether cognitive clustering was predictive of treatment response at 12-week and 1-year FU. RESULTS: Four cognitive clusters emerged: one with near normal cognition (42.9% of the FEP patients) with a general cognitive score of z=-0.20, one with selected cognitive deficits (14.3%) in the domains of verbal memory, processing speed and executive functions (general cognitive score of z=-0.55); and two severe deficit clusters consisting in one cluster with severe deficits (33.3%; general score of z=-1.48) and the other with a deeply compromised cognitive ability (9.55%; general cognitive score of z=-2.34). There were no significant differences between clusters in terms of clinical features at baseline (including diagnosis, positive and negative symptoms, medication), apart from the level of functioning that was significantly lower in the severely compromised cluster compared to the near normal cognition cluster. It emerged that majority (about 68%) of the patients from the near normal cognition cluster were responsive to treatment, whilst the majority of the selective and severely impaired clusters did not respond to treatment at 12-week follow-up. There were no significant results with regard to treatment response at 1-year FU. DISCUSSION: Distinct patterns of cognitive impairments exist within FEP that might be characterized by different response to treatment. Clinical presentation at the onset of the illness is not useful in predicting response to treatment later on in the course of the illness, while cognitive functioning might be a more valid indicator. Cognitive stratification could represent a promising way forward to elucidate pathophysiology of psychosis and to provide tailored interventions. Oxford University Press 2018-04 2018-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5887961/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby015.243 Text en © Maryland Psychiatric Research Center 2018. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Abstracts
Russo, Manuela
Ciufolini, Simone
Ajnakina, Olesya
Marques, Tiago Reis
Reichenberg, Avi
David, Anthony
Di Forti, Marta
Pariante, Carmine
Murray, Robin
Dazzan, Paola
O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title_full O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title_fullStr O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title_full_unstemmed O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title_short O8.7. COGNITIVE SUBTYPES IN FIRST-EPISODE PSYCHOSIS AND ASSOCIATION TO TREATMENT RESPONSE
title_sort o8.7. cognitive subtypes in first-episode psychosis and association to treatment response
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5887961/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby015.243
work_keys_str_mv AT russomanuela o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT ciufolinisimone o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT ajnakinaolesya o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT marquestiagoreis o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT reichenbergavi o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT davidanthony o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT difortimarta o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT pariantecarmine o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT murrayrobin o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse
AT dazzanpaola o87cognitivesubtypesinfirstepisodepsychosisandassociationtotreatmentresponse