Does early antipsychotic response predict long-term treatment outcome?

Early non-response as a predictor of later non-response to antipsychotics in schizophrenia: a randomized trial

BACKGROUND

It remains a challenge to predict the long-term response to antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia who do not respond at an early stage. This study aimed to investigate the optimal predictive cut-off value for early non-response that would better predict later non-response to antipsychotics in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

This multicenter, 8-week, open-label, randomized trial was conducted at 19 psychiatric centers throughout China. All enrolled participants were assigned to olanzapine, risperidone, amisulpride, or aripiprazole monotherapy for 8 weeks. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) was evaluated at baseline, week 2, week 4, and week 8. The main outcome was the prediction of nonresponse. Nonresponse is defined as a < 20% reduction in the total scores of PANSS from baseline to endpoint. Severity ratings of mild, moderate, and severe illness corresponded to baseline PANSS total scores of 58, 75, and 95, respectively.

RESULTS

At week 2, a reduction of < 5% in the PANSS total score showed the highest total accuracy in the severe and mild schizophrenia patients (total accuracy, 75.0% and 80.8%, respectively), and patients who were treated with the risperidone and amisulpride groups (total accuracy, 82.4%, and 78.2%, respectively). A 10% decrease exhibited the best overall accuracy in the moderate schizophrenia patients (total accuracy, 84.0%), olanzapine (total accuracy, 79.2%), and aripiprazole group (total accuracy, 77.4%). At week 4, the best predictive cut-off value was < 20%, regardless of the antipsychotic or severity of illness (total accuracy ranging from 89.8 to 92.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Symptom reduction at week 2 has acceptable discrimination in predicting later non-response to antipsychotics in schizophrenia, and a more accurate predictive cut-off value should be determined according to the medication regimen and baseline illness severity. The response to treatment during the next 2 weeks after week 2 could be further assessed to determine whether there is a need to change antipsychotic medication during the first four weeks.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered on Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03451734).

Psychotic disorders as a framework for precision psychiatry

People with psychotic disorders can show marked interindividual variations in the onset of illness, responses to treatment and relapse, but they receive broadly similar clinical care. Precision psychiatry is an approach that aims to stratify people with a given disorder according to different clinical outcomes and tailor treatment to their individual needs. At present, interindividual differences in outcomes of psychotic disorders are difficult to predict on the basis of clinical assessment alone. Therefore, current research in psychosis seeks to build models that predict outcomes by integrating clinical information with a range of biological measures. Here, we review recent progress in the application of precision psychiatry to psychotic disorders and consider the challenges associated with implementing this approach in clinical practice.

Topology predicts long-term functional outcome in early psychosis

Early intervention in psychosis is crucial to improving patient response to treatment and the functional deficits that critically affect their long-term quality of life. Stratification tools are needed to personalize functional deficit prevention strategies at an early stage. In the present study, we applied topological tools to analyze symptoms of early psychosis patients, and detected a clear stratification of the cohort into three groups. One of the groups had a significantly better psychosocial outcome than the others after a 3-year clinical follow-up. This group was characterized by a metabolic profile indicative of an activated antioxidant response, while that of the groups with poorer outcome was indicative of oxidative stress. We replicated in a second cohort the finding that the three distinct clinical profiles at baseline were associated with distinct outcomes at follow-up, thus validating the predictive value of this new stratification. This approach could assist in personalizing treatment strategies.