Cannabis and schizophrenia

The Effects of Cannabidiol and δ-9-Tetrahydrocannabinol in Social Cognition: A Naturalistic Controlled Study

Background: Social cognition abilities such as empathy and the Theory of Mind (ToM) have been shown to be impaired in neuropsychiatric conditions such as psychotic, autistic, and bipolar disorders. The endocannabinoid system (ECS) seems to play a role in social behavior and emotional processing while it also seems to play a role in those neuropsychiatric conditions showing social cognition impairments. Main plant cannabinoids delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) modulate the ECS and, due to their opposite effects, have been proposed as both cause and treatment for neuropsychiatric-related disorders such as schizophrenia, anxiety, or post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The aim of this study was to test the effects of THC and CBD on social cognition abilities in chronic cannabis users. Method: Eighteen members from a cannabis social club were tested for social cognition effects under the effects of different full spectrum cannabis extracts containing either THC, CBD, THC+CBD, or placebo in a naturalistic randomized double-blind crossover placebo-controlled study. Results: Results showed that participants under the effects of THC showed lower cognitive empathy when compared with the effects of CBD but not when those were compared with THC+CBD or placebo. Also, participants showed higher cognitive ToM under the effects of CBD when compared with the effects of placebo, but not when those were compared with THC or THC+CBD. However, we did not find differences on the emotional scales for empathy or ToM. Conclusions: This study provides evidence for the interaction between the effects of THC and CBD and social cognition abilities in a naturalistic environment, which can be of special interest for the clinical practice of medical cannabis on neuropsychiatric disorders. We show for the first time that CBD can improve ToM abilities in chronic cannabis users. Our results might help to understand the role of the ECS in social cognition, and their association with psychiatric and neurodevelopmental disorders such as schizophrenia or autism. Finally, we demonstrate how reliable methodologies can be implemented in naturalistic environments to collect valid ecological evidence outside classic laboratory settings.

Psychosocial and pharmacological treatments for cannabis use disorder and mental health comorbidities: a narrative review

Cannabis is the most widely used illicit drug worldwide, and it is estimated that up to 30% of people who use cannabis will develop a cannabis use disorder (CUD). Demand for treatment of CUD is increasing in almost every region of the world and cannabis use is highly comorbid with mental disorders, where sustained use can reduce treatment compliance and increase risk of relapse. In this narrative review, we outline evidence for psychosocial and pharmacological treatment strategies for CUD, both alone and when comorbid with psychosis, anxiety or depression. Psychosocial treatments such as cognitive behavioural therapy, motivational enhancement therapy and contingency management are currently the most effective strategy for treating CUD but are of limited benefit when comorbid with psychosis. Pharmacological treatments targeting the endocannabinoid system have the potential to reduce cannabis withdrawal and cannabis use in CUD. Mental health comorbidities including anxiety, depression and psychosis hinder effective treatment and should be addressed in treatment provision and clinical decision making to reduce the global burden of CUDs. Antipsychotic medication may decrease cannabis use and cannabis craving as well as psychotic symptoms in patients with CUD and psychosis. Targeted treatments for anxiety and depression when comorbid with CUD are feasible.

Psychotic disorder and cannabis use: Canadian hospitalization trends, 2006-2015

INTRODUCTION

Given the recent and impending changes to the legal status of nonmedical cannabis use in Canada, understanding the effects of cannabis use on the health care system is important for evaluating the impact of policy change. The aim of this study was to examine pre-legalization trends in hospitalizations for mental and behavioural disorders due to the use of cannabis, according to demographics factors and clinical conditions.

METHODS

We assessed the total number of inpatient hospitalizations for psychiatric conditions with a primary diagnosis of a mental or behavioural disorder due to cannabis use (ICD-10-CA code F12) from the Hospital Mental Health Database for ten years spanning 2006 to 2015, inclusive. We included hospitalizations from all provinces and territories except Quebec. Rates (per 100 000 persons) and relative proportions of hospitalizations by clinical condition, age group, sex and year are reported.

RESULTS

Between 2006 and 2015, the rate of cannabis-related hospitalizations in Canada doubled. Of special note, however, is that hospitalizations during this time period for those with the clinical condition code "mental and behavioural disorders due to use of cannabinoids, psychotic disorder" (F12.5) tripled, accounting for almost half (48%) of all cannabis-related hospitalizations in 2015.

CONCLUSION

Further research is required to investigate the reasons for the increase in hospitalizations for cannabis-related psychotic disorder. The introduction of high-potency cannabinoid products and synthetic cannabinoids into the illicit market are considered as possible factors.

Cannabis Use and the Risk for Psychosis and Affective Disorders

Objective: This review discusses the relationship between cannabis use and psychotic, bipolar, depressive, and anxiety disorders, as well as suicide. It summarizes epidemiological evidence from cross-sectional and long-term prospective studies and considers possible etiological mechanisms. Methods: Systematic reviews and methodologically robust studies in the field (from inception to February 2019) were identified using a comprehensive search of Medline, PsychINFO, and Embase and summarized using a narrative synthesis. Results: Consistent evidence, both from observational and experimental studies, has confirmed the important role of cannabis use in the initiation and persistence of psychotic disorders. The size of the effect is related to the extent of cannabis use, with greater risk for early cannabis use and use of high-potency varieties and synthetic cannabinoids. Accumulating evidence suggests that frequent cannabis use also increases the risk for mania as well as for suicide. However, the effect on depression is less clear and findings on anxiety are contradictory with only a few methodologically robust studies. Furthermore, the relationship with common mental disorders may involve reverse causality, as depression and anxiety are reported to lead to greater cannabis consumption in some studies. Pathogenetic mechanisms focus on the effect of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC, the main psychoactive ingredient of cannabis) interacting with genetic predisposition and perhaps other environmental risk factors. Cannabidiol (CBD), the other important ingredient of traditional cannabis, ameliorates the psychotogenic effects of THC but is absent from the high-potency varieties that are increasingly available. Conclusions: The evidence that heavy use of high-THC/low-CBD types of cannabis increases the risk of psychosis is sufficiently strong to merit public health education. Evidence of similar but smaller effects in mania and suicide is growing, but is not convincing for depression and anxiety. There is much current interest in the possibility that CBD may be therapeutically useful.

Benefits and harms of medical cannabis: a scoping review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

There has been increased interest in the role of cannabis for treating medical conditions. The availability of different cannabis-based products can make the side effects of exposure unpredictable. We sought to conduct a scoping review of systematic reviews assessing benefits and harms of cannabis-based medicines for any condition.

METHODS

A protocol was followed throughout the conduct of this scoping review. A protocol-guided scoping review conduct. Searches of bibliographic databases (e.g., MEDLINE®, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cochrane Library) and gray literature were performed. Two people selected and charted data from systematic reviews. Categorizations emerged during data synthesis. The reporting of results from systematic reviews was performed at a high level appropriate for a scoping review.

RESULTS

After screening 1975 citations, 72 systematic reviews were included. The reviews covered many conditions, the most common being pain management. Several reviews focused on management of pain as a symptom of conditions such as multiple sclerosis (MS), injury, and cancer. After pain, the most common symptoms treated were spasticity in MS, movement disturbances, nausea/vomiting, and mental health symptoms. An assessment of review findings lends to the understanding that, although in a small number of reviews results showed a benefit for reducing pain, the analysis approach and reporting in other reviews was sub-optimal, making it difficult to know how consistent findings are when considering pain in general. Adverse effects were reported in most reviews comparing cannabis with placebo (49/59, 83%) and in 20/24 (83%) of the reviews comparing cannabis to active drugs. Minor adverse effects (e.g., drowsiness, dizziness) were common and reported in over half of the reviews. Serious harms were not as common, but were reported in 21/59 (36%) reviews that reported on adverse effects. Overall, safety data was generally reported study-by-study, with few reviews synthesizing data. Only one review was rated as high quality, while the remaining were rated of moderate (n = 36) or low/critically low (n = 35) quality.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from the included reviews were mixed, with most reporting an inability to draw conclusions due to inconsistent findings and a lack of rigorous evidence. Mild harms were frequently reported, and it is possible the harms of cannabis-based medicines may outweigh benefits.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

The protocol for this scoping review was posted in the Open Access (https://ruor.uottawa.ca/handle/10393/37247).

Pharmacotherapies for cannabis dependence

BACKGROUND

Globally, cannabis use is prevalent and widespread. There are currently no pharmacotherapies approved for treatment of cannabis use disorders.This is an update of a Cochrane Review first published in the Cochrane Library in Issue 12, 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of pharmacotherapies as compared with each other, placebo or no pharmacotherapy (supportive care) for reducing symptoms of cannabis withdrawal and promoting cessation or reduction of cannabis use.

SEARCH METHODS

We updated our searches of the following databases to March 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs involving the use of medications to treat cannabis withdrawal or to promote cessation or reduction of cannabis use, or both, in comparison with other medications, placebo or no medication (supportive care) in people diagnosed as cannabis dependent or who were likely to be dependent.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 RCTs involving 1755 participants: 18 studies recruited adults (mean age 22 to 41 years); three studies targeted young people (mean age 20 years). Most (75%) participants were male. The studies were at low risk of performance, detection and selective outcome reporting bias. One study was at risk of selection bias, and three studies were at risk of attrition bias.All studies involved comparison of active medication and placebo. The medications were diverse, as were the outcomes reported, which limited the extent of analysis.Abstinence at end of treatment was no more likely with Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) preparations than with placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.98, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.64 to 1.52; 305 participants; 3 studies; moderate-quality evidence). For selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine, there was no difference in the likelihood of abstinence at end of treatment compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was qualitative evidence of reduced intensity of withdrawal symptoms with THC preparations compared to placebo. For other pharmacotherapies, this outcome was either not examined, or no significant differences was reported.Adverse effects were no more likely with THC preparations (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.17; 318 participants; 3 studies) or N-acetylcysteine (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.23; 418 participants; 2 studies) compared to placebo (moderate-quality evidence). For SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine, there was no difference in adverse effects compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was no difference in the likelihood of withdrawal from treatment due to adverse effects with THC preparations, SSRIs antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers, buspirone and N-acetylcysteine compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence).There was no difference in the likelihood of treatment completion with THC preparations, SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants and buspirone compared to placebo (low- to very low-quality evidence) or with N-acetylcysteine compared to placebo (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.21; 418 participants; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence). Anticonvulsants and mood stabilisers appeared to reduce the likelihood of treatment completion (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.47 to 0.92; 141 participants; 3 studies; low-quality evidence).Available evidence on gabapentin (anticonvulsant), oxytocin (neuropeptide) and atomoxetine was insufficient for estimates of effectiveness.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is incomplete evidence for all of the pharmacotherapies investigated, and for many outcomes the quality of the evidence was low or very low. Findings indicate that SSRI antidepressants, mixed action antidepressants, bupropion, buspirone and atomoxetine are probably of little value in the treatment of cannabis dependence. Given the limited evidence of efficacy, THC preparations should be considered still experimental, with some positive effects on withdrawal symptoms and craving. The evidence base for the anticonvulsant gabapentin, oxytocin, and N-acetylcysteine is weak, but these medications are also worth further investigation.

A survey of the attitudes, beliefs and knowledge about medical cannabis among primary care providers

Background

Healthcare providers play a critical role in facilitating patient access to medical cannabis. However, previous surveys suggest only a minority of providers believe that medical cannabis confers benefits to patients. Significant new knowledge about the potential benefits and harms of medical cannabis has recently emerged. Understanding current attitudes and beliefs of providers may provide insight into the ongoing challenges they face as states expand access to medical cannabis.

Methods

We conducted an electronic survey of primary care providers in a large Minnesota-based healthcare system between January 23 and February 5, 2018. We obtained information about provider characteristics, attitudes and beliefs about medical cannabis, provider comfort level in answering patient questions about medical cannabis, and whether providers were interested in receiving additional education.

Results

Sixty-two providers completed the survey (response rate 31%; 62/199). Seventy-six percent of respondents were physicians and the average age was 46.3 years. A majority of providers believed (“strongly agree” or “somewhat agree”) that medical cannabis was a legitimate medical therapy (58.1%) and 38.7% believed that providers should be offering to patients for managing medical conditions. A majority (> 50%) of providers believed that medical cannabis was helpful for treating the qualifying medical conditions of cancer, terminal illness, and intractable pain. A majority of providers did not know if medical cannabis was effective for managing nearly one-half of the other state designated qualifying medical conditions. Few believed that medical cannabis improved quality of life domains. Over one-third of providers believed that medical cannabis interacted with medical therapies. One-half of providers were not ready to or did not want to answer patient questions about medical cannabis, and the majority of providers wanted to learn more about it.

Conclusions

Healthcare providers generally believe that medical cannabis is a legitimate medical therapy. Provider knowledge gaps about the effectiveness of medical cannabis for state designated qualifying conditions need to be addressed, and accurate information about the potential for drug interactions needs to be disseminated to address provider concerns. Clinical trial data about how medical cannabis improves patient quality of life domains is desperately needed as this information can impact clinical decision-making.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12875-019-0906-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Medicinal cannabis (Bedrolite) substitution therapy in inpatients with a psychotic disorder and a comorbid cannabis use disorder: A case series

Cannabis use disorders are frequently comorbid in patients with a psychotic disorder and are associated with worse outcomes. To date there are no proven effective strategies to achieve cannabis abstinence in this population. An alternative for abstinence might be harm reduction, i.e. replacing the use of street cannabis with high tetrahydrocannabinol and low cannabidiol levels by medicinal cannabis variants with relatively low tetrahydrocannabinol and relatively high cannabidiol levels, thereby reducing the psychosis inducing effects of cannabis and enhancing the antipsychotic effects of cannabis. Here we present the data of a case series with seven inpatients diagnosed with a psychotic disorder and a treatment-resistant cannabis use disorder who received substitution therapy with a low tetrahydrocannabinol medicinal cannabis variant (Bedrolite). The results suggest that the low tetrahydrocannabinol medicinal cannabis variant Bedrolite is not effective in the treatment of inpatients with a psychotic disorder and comorbid cannabis use disorder. Bedrolite is thus not very likely to become an effective harm reduction strategy in these patients.

Risperidone versus other antipsychotics for people with severe mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse

BACKGROUND

Up to 75% of people with serious mental illness (SMI) such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder have co-occurring substance use disorders (dual diagnosis). Dual diagnosis can have an adverse effect on treatment and prognosis of SMI.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effects of risperidone compared to treatment with other antipsychotics (first-generation and other second-generation antipsychotics) used in people with serious mental illness and co-occurring substance misuse.

SEARCH METHODS

On 6 January 2016 and 9 October 2017, we searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group's Study-Based Register of Trials (including trial registers).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We selected randomised trials of risperidone versus any other antipsychotic in people with SMI and substance abuse (dual diagnosis). We included trials meeting our inclusion criteria and reporting useable data. We excluded trials that either did not meet our inclusion criteria or met our inclusion criteria but did not report any useable data.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently inspected citations and selected studies. For included studies, we independently extracted data and appraised study quality. For binary outcomes we calculated the risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals. For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean differences (MDs) and their 95% confidence intervals. We pooled data using random-effects meta-analyses and assessed the quality of evidence, creating a 'Summary of findings' table using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified eight randomised trials containing a total of 1073 participants with SMI and co-occurring substance misuse. Seven of these contributed useable data to the review. There was heterogeneity in trial design and measurement. Risperidone was compared to clozapine, olanzapine, perphenazine, quetiapine and ziprasidone. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents. Few trials examined participants with a dual diagnosis from the outset and most trials only contained separate analyses of subgroups with a dual diagnosis or were secondary data analyses of subgroups of people with a dual diagnosis from existing larger trials.For risperidone versus clozapine we found no clear differences between these two antipsychotics in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 randomised controlled trial (RCT), n = 36, mean difference (MD) 0.90, 95% CI -2.21 to 4.01, very low quality evidence), or reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 14, risk ratio (RR) 1.00, 95% CI 0.30 to 3.35, very low quality evidence), improvement in subjective well-being (1 RCT, n = 36, MD -6.00, 95% CI -14.82 to 2.82, very low quality evidence), numbers discontinuing medication (1 RCT, n = 36, RR 4.05, 95% CI 0.21 to 78.76, very low quality evidence), extrapyramidal side-effects (2 RCTs, n = 50, RR 2.71, 95% CI 0.30 to 24.08; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCTs, n = 45, RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.51; I² = 34%, very low quality evidence). Clozapine was associated with lower levels of craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 28, MD 7.00, 95% CI 2.37 to 11.63, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus olanzapine we found no clear differences in the reduction of positive psychotic symptoms (1 RCT, n = 37, MD -1.50, 95% CI -3.82 to 0.82, very low quality evidence), reduction in cannabis use (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 0.40, 95% CI -4.72 to 5.52, very low quality evidence), craving for cannabis (1 RCT, n = 41, MD 5.00, 95% CI -4.86 to 14.86, very low quality evidence), parkinsonism (1 RCT, n = 16, MD -0.08, 95% CI -1.21 to 1.05, very low quality evidence), or leaving the study early (2 RCT, n = 77, RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.35; I² = 0%, very low quality evidence).For risperidone versus perphenazine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 281, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.20, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus quetiapine, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 294, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.07, low-quality evidence).For risperidone versus ziprasidone, we found no clear differences in the number of participants leaving the study early (1 RCT, n = 240, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.10, low-quality evidence).For many comparisons, important outcomes were missing; and no data were reported in any study for metabolic disturbances, global impression of illness severity, quality of life or mortality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is not sufficient good-quality evidence available to determine the effects of risperidone compared with other antipsychotics in people with a dual diagnosis. Few trials compared risperidone with first-generation agents, leading to limited applicability to settings where access to second-generation agents is limited, such as in low- and middle-income countries. Moreover, heterogeneity in trial design and measurement of outcomes precluded the use of many trials in our analyses. Future trials in this area need to be sufficiently powered but also need to conform to consistent methods in study population selection, use of measurement scales, definition of outcomes, and measures to counter risk of bias. Investigators should adhere to CONSORT guidelines in the reporting of results.

Canadian Schizophrenia Guidelines: Schizophrenia and Other Psychotic Disorders with Coexisting Substance Use Disorders

OBJECTIVE

Persons with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders frequently have coexisting substance use disorders that require modifications to treatment approaches for best outcomes. The objectives of this review were to identify evidence-based practices best practices that improve outcomes for individuals with schizophrenia and substance used disorders.

METHOD

We reviewed guidelines that were published in the last 5 years and that included systematic reviews or meta-analyses. Most of our recommendations came from 2 publications from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE): the 2011 guidance titled Coexisting Severe Mental Illness (Psychosis) and Substance Misuse: Assessment and Management in Healthcare Settings and the 2014 guidance titled Psychosis and Schizophrenia in Adults: Prevention and Management. We placed these recommendations into the Canadian context to create this guideline.

RESULTS

Evidence supports the inclusion of individuals with coexisting substance use disorders in first-episode psychosis programs. The programs should integrate psychosis and substance use treatments, emphasizing ongoing monitoring of both substance use and patterns and symptoms. The best outcomes are achieved with combined use of antipsychotic medications and addiction-based psychosocial interventions. However, limited evidence is available to recommend using one antipsychotic medication over another or one psychosocial intervention over another for persons with schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders with coexisting substance use disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Treating persons who have schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders with coexisting substance use disorders can present clinical challenges, but modifications in practice can help engage and retain people in treatment, where significant improvements over time can be expected.

New Targets for Schizophrenia Treatment beyond the Dopamine Hypothesis

Schizophrenia has been primarily associated with dopamine dysfunction, and treatments have been developed that target the dopamine pathway in the central nervous system. However, accumulating evidence has shown that the core pathophysiology of schizophrenia might involve dysfunction in dopaminergic, glutamatergic, serotonergic, and gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) signaling, which may lead to aberrant functioning of interneurons that manifest as cognitive, behavioral, and social dysfunction through altered functioning of a broad range of macro- and microcircuits. The interactions between neurotransmitters can be modeled as nodes and edges by using graph theory, and oxidative balance, immune, and glutamatergic systems may represent multiple nodes interlocking at a central hub; imbalance within any of these nodes might affect the entire system. Therefore, this review attempts to address novel treatment targets beyond the dopamine hypothesis, including glutamate, serotonin, acetylcholine, GABA, and inflammatory cytokines. Furthermore, we outline that these treatment targets can be possibly integrated with novel treatment strategies aimed at different symptoms or phases of the illness. We anticipate that reversing anomalous activity in these novel treatment targets or combinations between these strategies might be beneficial in the treatment of schizophrenia.

Suppression of Methamphetamine Self-Administration by Ketamine Pre-treatment Is Absent in the Methylazoxymethanol (MAM) Rat Model of Schizophrenia

Ketamine may prove to be a potential candidate in treating the widespread drug addiction/substance abuse epidemic among patients with schizophrenia. Clinical studies have shown ketamine to reduce cocaine and heroin cravings. However, the use of ketamine remains controversial as it may exacerbate the symptoms of schizophrenia. Therefore, the aim of this study is to characterize the effects of ketamine on drug addiction in schizophrenia using the methylazoxymethanol (MAM) acetate rat model on operant IV methamphetamine (METH) self-administration. MAM was administered intraperitoneally (22 mg/kg) on gestational day 17. Locomotor activity test and later IV self-administration (IVSA) were then performed in the male offspring followed by a period of forced abstinence and relapse of METH taking. After reaching stable intakes in the relapse phase, ketamine (5 mg/kg) was administered intraperitoneally 30 min prior to the self-administration session. As documented previously, the MAM rats showed a lack of habituation in the locomotor activity test but developed stable maintenance of METH self-administration with no difference in operant behaviour to control animals. Results show that ketamine treatment significantly reduced the METH intake in the control animals but not in MAM animals. Ketamine effect on METH self-administration may be explained by increased glutamatergic signalling in the prefrontal cortex caused by the N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonism and disinhibition of GABA interneurons which was shown to be impaired in the MAM rats. This mechanism may at least partly explain the clinically proven anti-craving potential of ketamine and allow development of more specific anti-craving medications with fewer risks.

Substance Use Disorders and Schizophrenia

Substance use disorders are prevalent co-occurring problems among people with schizophrenia, with lifetime rates approaching 80% in this population when tobacco use is taken into account. Substance use disorders are associated with significant adverse effects among people with schizophrenia, including worse psychiatric symptoms, lower functioning, and increased medical morbidity and mortality compared with schizophrenia patients without co-occurring substance use. The etiology of this relationship is multifactorial, involving neurobiological, genetic, and environmental factors. The substances most commonly used by people with schizophrenia are tobacco, alcohol, cannabis, and cocaine. Screening, diagnosis, and treatment of substance use disorders are important and can have significant effects on clinical outcomes. Treatments for comorbid disorders include psychopharmacological, psychotherapeutic, and multidisciplinary interventions. Several medications have been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of substance use disorders, which also appear to be helpful for patients with schizophrenia, although few controlled trials have been conducted specifically in this population. Psychosocial and psychological interventions have been adapted for use among patients with schizophrenia as well. Treatment of both psychotic illness and substance use disorders in an integrated way improves functional and clinical outcomes.

Dysregulated peripheral endocannabinoid system signaling is associated with cognitive deficits in first-episode psychosis

Among etiological explanations for psychosis, several hypotheses involving alterations on the immune/inflammatory system have been proposed. The endocannabinoid system (ECS) is an endogenous neuroprotective, anti-inflammatory system that modulates cognitive processes. Its altered expression has been associated with psychotic disorders. 73 patients with a first episode of psychoses (FEP) and 67 healthy controls were recruited in 5 university centers in Spain. The protein expression of the main peripheral ECS components was determined in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. The cognition function was assessed following the MATRICS consensus. After controlling for potential confounding factors, working memory statistically correlated to the peripheral N-acyl phosphatidylethanolamine phospholipase expression (p = 0.039). The short-term verbal memory correlated to the Diacylglycerol lipase (p = 0.043) and the fatty acid amide hydrolase (p = 0.026) expression. Finally, attention measures correlated to the Monoacylglycerol lipase expression, by means of the CPT-II commissions (p = 0.036) and detectability (p = 0.026) scores. The ECS may regulate the activation of key mediators in immune and inflammatory responses that may be involved in the primary neuronal stress phenomenon that occurs from the onset of psychotic illness. This study points a relationship between the ECS and the cognitive function in early psychosis and suggests the use of some of the ECS elements as biomarkers and/or pharmacological targets for FEP.

Association Between Lifetime Marijuana Use and Cognitive Function in Middle Age: The Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) Study

IMPORTANCE

Marijuana use is increasingly common in the United States. It is unclear whether it has long-term effects on memory and other domains of cognitive function.

OBJECTIVE

To study the association between cumulative lifetime exposure to marijuana use and cognitive performance in middle age.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

We used data from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults (CARDIA) study, a cohort of 5115 black and white men and women aged 18 to 30 years at baseline from March 25, 1985, to June 7, 1986 (year 0), and followed up over 25 years from June 7, 1986, to August 31, 2011, to estimate cumulative years of exposure to marijuana (1 year = 365 days of marijuana use) using repeated measures and to assess associations with cognitive function at year 25. Linear regression was used to adjust for demographic factors, cardiovascular risk factors, tobacco smoking, use of alcohol and illicit drugs, physical activity, depression, and results of the mirror star tracing test (a measure of cognitive function) at year 2. Data analysis was conducted from June 7, 1986, to August 31, 2011.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Three domains of cognitive function were assessed at year 25 using the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (verbal memory), the Digit Symbol Substitution Test (processing speed), and the Stroop Interference Test (executive function).

RESULTS

Among 3385 participants with cognitive function measurements at the year 25 visit, 2852 (84.3%) reported past marijuana use, but only 392 (11.6%) continued to use marijuana into middle age. Current use of marijuana was associated with worse verbal memory and processing speed; cumulative lifetime exposure was associated with worse performance in all 3 domains of cognitive function. After excluding current users and adjusting for potential confounders, cumulative lifetime exposure to marijuana remained significantly associated with worse verbal memory. For each 5 years of past exposure, verbal memory was 0.13 standardized units lower (95% CI, -0.24 to -0.02; P = .02), corresponding to a mean of 1 of 2 participants remembering 1 word fewer from a list of 15 words for every 5 years of use. After adjustment, we found no associations with lower executive function (-0.03 [95% CI, -0.12 to 0.07]; P = .56) or processing speed (-0.04 [95% CI, -0.16 to 0.08]; P = .51).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Past exposure to marijuana is associated with worse verbal memory but does not appear to affect other domains of cognitive function.

Cannabinoids: Medical implications

Herbal cannabis has been used for thousands of years for medical purposes. With elucidation of the chemical structures of tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD) and with discovery of the human endocannabinoid system, the medical usefulness of cannabinoids has been more intensively explored. While more randomized clinical trials are needed for some medical conditions, other medical disorders, like chronic cancer and neuropathic pain and certain symptoms of multiple sclerosis, have substantial evidence supporting cannabinoid efficacy. While herbal cannabis has not met rigorous FDA standards for medical approval, specific well-characterized cannabinoids have met those standards. Where medical cannabis is legal, patients typically see a physician who "certifies" that a benefit may result. Physicians must consider important patient selection criteria such as failure of standard medical treatment for a debilitating medical disorder. Medical cannabis patients must be informed about potential adverse effects, such as acute impairment of memory, coordination and judgment, and possible chronic effects, such as cannabis use disorder, cognitive impairment, and chronic bronchitis. In addition, social dysfunction may result at work/school, and there is increased possibility of motor vehicle accidents. Novel ways to manipulate the endocannbinoid system are being explored to maximize benefits of cannabinoid therapy and lessen possible harmful effects.

Animal models of gene-environment interaction in schizophrenia: A dimensional perspective

Schizophrenia has long been considered as a disorder with multifactorial origins. Recent discoveries have advanced our understanding of the genetic architecture of the disease. However, even with the increase of identified risk variants, heritability estimates suggest an important contribution of non-genetic factors. Various environmental risk factors have been proposed to play a role in the etiopathogenesis of schizophrenia. These include season of birth, maternal infections, obstetric complications, adverse events at early childhood, and drug abuse. Despite the progress in identification of genetic and environmental risk factors, we still have a limited understanding of the mechanisms whereby gene-environment interactions (G × E) operate in schizophrenia and psychoses at large. In this review we provide a critical analysis of current animal models of G × E relevant to psychotic disorders and propose that dimensional perspective will advance our understanding of the complex mechanisms of these disorders.

Trans-Sector Integrated Treatment in Psychosis and Addiction

BACKGROUND

Patients with psychosis often develop comorbid addiction, with a lifetime prevalence of ca. 50%. Dual diagnoses are considered hard to treat. Long-term integrated treatment programs might improve such patients' outcomes, at least to a moderate extent, but they have not yet been adequately studied or implemented in Germany to date.

METHODS

100 dual diagnosis patients participated in a single-center, randomized, controlled trial under standard hospital treatment conditions. They were randomly allotted to two groups. Patients in the intervention group were admitted to a specialized open hospital ward, where they were given integrated treatment, including disorder-specific group therapy. Their treatment was continued with further disorder-specific group therapy in the outpatient setting. Patients in the control group were admitted to an open general psychiatric ward and received treatment as usual, but no disorder-specific treatment either during their hospitalization or in the subsequent outpatient phase. Follow-up examinations were performed three, six, and twelve months after inclusion. The primary outcome was defined as the changes in substance use and abstinence motivation. The secondary outcome consisted of the patients' satisfaction with treatment and with life in general, retention rate, psychopathology, rehospitalizations, and global level of functioning.

RESULTS

The patients in the intervention group developed higher abstinence motivation than those in the control group (p = 0.009) and transiently reduced their substance use to a greater extent (p = 0.039 at three months). They were also more satisfied with their treatment (group effect: p = 0.011). Their global level of functioning and their retention rate were also higher, but these differences did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Low-threshold, motivational, integrated treatment programs with psycho-educative and behavioral therapeutic elements may be helpful in the treatment of dual diagnosis patients and should be more extensively implemented as part of standard hospital treatment. Larger-scale, methodologically more complex studies will be needed to identify subgroups of patients that respond to such treatments in different ways.

Safety and Toxicology of Cannabinoids

There is extensive research on the safety, toxicology, potency, and therapeutic potential of cannabis. However, uncertainty remains facilitating continued debate on medical and recreational cannabis policies at the state and federal levels. This review will include a brief description of cannabinoids and the endocannabinoid system; a summary of the acute and long-term effects of cannabis; and a discussion of the therapeutic potential of cannabis. The conclusions about safety and efficacy will then be compared with the current social and political climate to suggest future policy directions and general guidelines.

An evaluation of variation in published estimates of schizophrenia prevalence from 1990─2013: a systematic literature review

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of consistency in findings across studies on the prevalence of schizophrenia, and no recent systematic review of the literature exists. The purpose of this study is to provide an updated systematic review of population-based prevalence estimates and to understand the factors that could account for this variation in prevalence estimates.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, and PsycInfo databases were searched for observational studies describing schizophrenia prevalence in general populations from 2003-2013 and supplemented by studies from a prior review covering 1990-2002. Studies reporting prevalence estimates from specialized populations such as institutionalized, homeless, or incarcerated persons were excluded. Prevalence estimates were compared both across and within studies by factors that might contribute to variability using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Sixty-five primary studies were included; thirty-one (48 %) were from Europe and 35 (54 %) were conducted in samples of ≥50,000 persons. Among 21 studies reporting 12-month prevalence, the median estimate was 0.33 % with an interquartile range (IQR) of 0.26 %-0.51 %. The median estimate of lifetime prevalence among 29 studies was 0.48 % (IQR: 0.34 %-0.85 %). Prevalence across studies appeared to vary by study design, geographic region, time of assessment, and study quality scores; associations between study sample size and prevalence were not observed. Within studies, age-adjusted estimates were higher than crude estimates by 17 %-138 %, the use of a broader definition of schizophrenia spectrum disorders compared to schizophrenia increased case identification by 18 %-90 %, identification of cases from inpatient-only settings versus any setting decreased prevalence by 60 %, and no consistent trends were noted by differing diagnostic criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

This review provides updated information on the epidemiology of schizophrenia in general populations, which is vital information for many stakeholders. Study characteristics appear to play an important role in the variation between estimates. Overall, the evidence is still sparse; for many countries no new studies were identified.

Cannabis and schizophrenia

BACKGROUND

Many people with schizophrenia smoke cannabis, and it is unclear why a large proportion do so and if the effects are harmful or beneficial. It is also unclear what the best method is to allow people with schizophrenia to alter their cannabis intake.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of specific psychological treatments for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia. To assess the effects of antipsychotics for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia. To assess the effects of cannabinoids (cannabis-related chemical compounds derived from cannabis or manufactured) for symptom reduction in people with schizophrenia.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register (August 2013) and all references of articles selected for further relevant trials. We contacted the first author of included studies for unpublished trials or data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomized controlled trials involving cannabinoids and schizophrenia/schizophrenia-like illnesses, which assessed: (1) treatments to reduce cannabis use in people with schizophrenia and (2) the effects of cannabinoids on people with schizophrenia.

CONCLUSIONS

Results are limited and inconclusive due to the small number and size of randomized controlled trials available and quality of data reporting within these trials. Currently, there is no evidence to demonstrate that one type of adjunct psychological therapy or one type of drug therapy is more effective than another. There is also insufficient evidence to show that cannabidiol has an antipsychotic effect.