Cargando…

S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY

BACKGROUND: Present pharmacological treatment approaches in schizophrenia rest on “neuroleptic” drugs, all of which act as antagonists at dopamine D2/D3 receptors but additionally display major variability in their binding capacity to neurotransmitter receptors (Van Os & Kapur 2009). At present,...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Iglesias, Sandra, Siemerkus, Jakob, Bischof, Martin, Tomiello, Sara, Schöbi, Dario, Weber, Lilian, Heinzle, Jakob, Möller, Julian, Egger, Stephan, Gerke, Wolfgang, Baumgartner, Markus, Kawohl, Wolfram, Borgwardt, Stefan, Kaiser, Stefan, Haker, Helene, Stephan, Klaas Enno
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5888726/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby018.810
_version_ 1783312586303864832
author Iglesias, Sandra
Siemerkus, Jakob
Bischof, Martin
Tomiello, Sara
Schöbi, Dario
Weber, Lilian
Heinzle, Jakob
Möller, Julian
Egger, Stephan
Gerke, Wolfgang
Baumgartner, Markus
Kawohl, Wolfram
Borgwardt, Stefan
Kaiser, Stefan
Haker, Helene
Stephan, Klaas Enno
author_facet Iglesias, Sandra
Siemerkus, Jakob
Bischof, Martin
Tomiello, Sara
Schöbi, Dario
Weber, Lilian
Heinzle, Jakob
Möller, Julian
Egger, Stephan
Gerke, Wolfgang
Baumgartner, Markus
Kawohl, Wolfram
Borgwardt, Stefan
Kaiser, Stefan
Haker, Helene
Stephan, Klaas Enno
author_sort Iglesias, Sandra
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Present pharmacological treatment approaches in schizophrenia rest on “neuroleptic” drugs, all of which act as antagonists at dopamine D2/D3 receptors but additionally display major variability in their binding capacity to neurotransmitter receptors (Van Os & Kapur 2009). At present, the choice of any particular drug does not rest on any principled criteria: Once individual treatment has been started, therapeutic efficacy is monitored clinically, and a switch to a different drug is initiated when clear improvements remain absent after a few weeks. It is presently not possible to predict in advance which patients will respond well to a particular drug and who will experience little or no benefit (Case et al. 2011; Kapur et al. 2012). For instance, clozapine and olanzapine are often prescribed after other antipsychotics have shown to be ineffective in patients with schizophrenia or related disorders due to their pronounced side-effects. Both drugs, clozapine and olanzapine, share certain pharmacodynamic properties with comparatively low affinity towards dopamine D2-receptors, but very high affinity towards muscarinic receptors – a unique constellation that distinguishes them from other common antipsychotics. Importantly, previous studies have shown that a subgroup of schizophrenia patients might particularly benefit from these properties (Raedler et al. 2003, Scarr et al. 2009). Here, we present an ongoing observational study (COMPASS) which builds on these observations and addresses the question whether functional readouts of dopaminergic and muscarinic systems in individual patients could enable personalised treatment predictions. Guided by the dysconnection hypothesis of schizophrenia (Stephan et al., 2009), which postulates aberrant interactions between NMDA receptors and neuromodulators like dopamine/acetylcholine, the COMPASS study adopts a neuromodeling approach. The focus is on EEG/fMRI paradigms and computational models with empirically demonstrated sensitivity for altered function of NMDA, dopamine and muscarinic receptors, respectively. METHODS: To detect even small effect sizes, the study aims to recruit N=120 patients with schizophrenia who begin treatment with, switch to, or augment medication with olanzapine or clozapine. If possible, a replication sample (an additional N=120) will be recruited, too. Patients will be examined +/- 96h relative to treatment onset. Data acquisition encompasses the following measurements: Clinical interview, EEG (working memory, reward learning under volatility, auditory MMN under volatility, “resting”-state), MRI (optional; fMRI during auditory MMN under volatility, “resting”-state, and structural imaging), blood samples (genetic and biochemical analyses). After 2 and 8 weeks a clinical follow-up is conducted. RESULTS: The study is ongoing. DISCUSSION: The EEG/fMRI data will be analysed by computational models that infer functional states of glutamatergic, dopaminergic, and cholinergic systems (for review, Stephan et al. 2015). Model parameter estimates will serve as features in machine learning analyses of treatment prediction (Brodersen et al. 2014). If successful, this proof-of-concept study will lead to clinically useful tests for predicting the efficacy of clozapine/olanzapine prior to or during very early treatment. This could have a significant impact on clinical management as it would enable predicting, at an early stage, the therapeutic benefit for individual patients. Our neuromodeling approach to individual predictions may thus provide a principled basis for treatment decisions, help spare side-effects and enable informed switches in treatment strategy.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-5888726
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-58887262018-04-11 S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY Iglesias, Sandra Siemerkus, Jakob Bischof, Martin Tomiello, Sara Schöbi, Dario Weber, Lilian Heinzle, Jakob Möller, Julian Egger, Stephan Gerke, Wolfgang Baumgartner, Markus Kawohl, Wolfram Borgwardt, Stefan Kaiser, Stefan Haker, Helene Stephan, Klaas Enno Schizophr Bull Abstracts BACKGROUND: Present pharmacological treatment approaches in schizophrenia rest on “neuroleptic” drugs, all of which act as antagonists at dopamine D2/D3 receptors but additionally display major variability in their binding capacity to neurotransmitter receptors (Van Os & Kapur 2009). At present, the choice of any particular drug does not rest on any principled criteria: Once individual treatment has been started, therapeutic efficacy is monitored clinically, and a switch to a different drug is initiated when clear improvements remain absent after a few weeks. It is presently not possible to predict in advance which patients will respond well to a particular drug and who will experience little or no benefit (Case et al. 2011; Kapur et al. 2012). For instance, clozapine and olanzapine are often prescribed after other antipsychotics have shown to be ineffective in patients with schizophrenia or related disorders due to their pronounced side-effects. Both drugs, clozapine and olanzapine, share certain pharmacodynamic properties with comparatively low affinity towards dopamine D2-receptors, but very high affinity towards muscarinic receptors – a unique constellation that distinguishes them from other common antipsychotics. Importantly, previous studies have shown that a subgroup of schizophrenia patients might particularly benefit from these properties (Raedler et al. 2003, Scarr et al. 2009). Here, we present an ongoing observational study (COMPASS) which builds on these observations and addresses the question whether functional readouts of dopaminergic and muscarinic systems in individual patients could enable personalised treatment predictions. Guided by the dysconnection hypothesis of schizophrenia (Stephan et al., 2009), which postulates aberrant interactions between NMDA receptors and neuromodulators like dopamine/acetylcholine, the COMPASS study adopts a neuromodeling approach. The focus is on EEG/fMRI paradigms and computational models with empirically demonstrated sensitivity for altered function of NMDA, dopamine and muscarinic receptors, respectively. METHODS: To detect even small effect sizes, the study aims to recruit N=120 patients with schizophrenia who begin treatment with, switch to, or augment medication with olanzapine or clozapine. If possible, a replication sample (an additional N=120) will be recruited, too. Patients will be examined +/- 96h relative to treatment onset. Data acquisition encompasses the following measurements: Clinical interview, EEG (working memory, reward learning under volatility, auditory MMN under volatility, “resting”-state), MRI (optional; fMRI during auditory MMN under volatility, “resting”-state, and structural imaging), blood samples (genetic and biochemical analyses). After 2 and 8 weeks a clinical follow-up is conducted. RESULTS: The study is ongoing. DISCUSSION: The EEG/fMRI data will be analysed by computational models that infer functional states of glutamatergic, dopaminergic, and cholinergic systems (for review, Stephan et al. 2015). Model parameter estimates will serve as features in machine learning analyses of treatment prediction (Brodersen et al. 2014). If successful, this proof-of-concept study will lead to clinically useful tests for predicting the efficacy of clozapine/olanzapine prior to or during very early treatment. This could have a significant impact on clinical management as it would enable predicting, at an early stage, the therapeutic benefit for individual patients. Our neuromodeling approach to individual predictions may thus provide a principled basis for treatment decisions, help spare side-effects and enable informed switches in treatment strategy. Oxford University Press 2018-04 2018-04-01 /pmc/articles/PMC5888726/ http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby018.810 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
Iglesias, Sandra
Siemerkus, Jakob
Bischof, Martin
Tomiello, Sara
Schöbi, Dario
Weber, Lilian
Heinzle, Jakob
Möller, Julian
Egger, Stephan
Gerke, Wolfgang
Baumgartner, Markus
Kawohl, Wolfram
Borgwardt, Stefan
Kaiser, Stefan
Haker, Helene
Stephan, Klaas Enno
S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title_full S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title_fullStr S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title_full_unstemmed S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title_short S23. INTRODUCING COMPASS: COMPARING BRAIN ACTIVITY ACROSS PATIENTS WITH DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT RESPONSE IN SCHIZOPHRENIA – AN OBSERVATIONAL STUDY
title_sort s23. introducing compass: comparing brain activity across patients with differential treatment response in schizophrenia – an observational study
topic Abstracts
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5888726/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby018.810
work_keys_str_mv AT iglesiassandra s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT siemerkusjakob s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT bischofmartin s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT tomiellosara s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT schobidario s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT weberlilian s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT heinzlejakob s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT mollerjulian s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT eggerstephan s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT gerkewolfgang s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT baumgartnermarkus s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT kawohlwolfram s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT borgwardtstefan s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT kaiserstefan s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT hakerhelene s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy
AT stephanklaasenno s23introducingcompasscomparingbrainactivityacrosspatientswithdifferentialtreatmentresponseinschizophreniaanobservationalstudy