World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia, Part 1: Update 2012 on the acute treatment of schizophrenia and the management of treatment resistance

These updated guidelines are based on a first edition of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Schizophrenia published in 2005. For this 2012 revision, all available publications pertaining to the biological treatment of schizophrenia were reviewed systematically to allow for an evidence-based update. These guidelines provide evidence-based practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful and these guidelines are intended to be used by all physicians diagnosing and treating people suffering from schizophrenia. Based on the first version of these guidelines, a systematic review of the MEDLINE/PUBMED database and the Cochrane Library, in addition to data extraction from national treatment guidelines, has been performed for this update. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and then categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F; Bandelow et al. 2008b, World J Biol Psychiatry 9: 242). This first part of the updated guidelines covers the general descriptions of antipsychotics and their side effects, the biological treatment of acute schizophrenia and the management of treatment-resistant schizophrenia.

Neuropsychological predictors of response to randomized treatment in obsessive-compulsive disorder

Objective: To identify neuropsychological predictors of treatment response to cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) and fluoxetine in treatment-naive adults with obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD). Method: Thirty-eight adult outpatients with OCD underwent neuropsychological assessment, including tasks of intellectual function, executive functioning and visual and verbal memory, before randomization to a 12-week clinical trial of either CBT or fluoxetine. Neuropsychological measures were used to identify predictors of treatment response in OCD. Results: Neuropsychological measures that predicted a better treatment response to either CBT or fluoxetine were higher verbal IQ (Wechsler Abbreviated Scale of Intelligence) (p = 0.008); higher verbal memory on the California Verbal Learning Test (p = 0.710); shorter time to complete part D (Dots) (p<0.001), longer time to complete part W (Words) (p = 0.025) and less errors on part C (Colors) (p<0.001) in the Victoria Stroop Test (VST). Fewer perseverations on the California Verbal Learning Test, a measure of mental flexibility, predicted better response to CBT, but worse response to fluoxetine (p = 0.002). Conclusion: In general, OCD patients with better cognitive and executive abilities at baseline were more prone to respond to either CBT or fluoxetine. Our finding that neuropsychological measures of mental flexibility predicted response to treatment in opposite directions for CBT and fluoxetine suggests that OCD patients with different neuropsychological profiles may respond preferentially to one type of treatment versus the other. Further studies with larger samples of OCD patients are necessary to investigate the heuristic value of such findings in a clinical context. (C) 2012 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Tracking the impact of translational research in psychiatry: state of the art and perspectives

Personalized treatments have become a primary goal in translational psychiatric research. They include the identification of neural circuits associated with psychiatric disorders and definition of treatment according to individual characteristics. Many new tools and technologies have been developed but further efforts are required to provide clues on how these scientific advances in psychiatry may be translated into more effective therapeutic approaches. Obstacles to the progress of translational psychiatry also involve numerous scientific, financial, ethical, logistics and regulatory aspects. Also, the goal of DSM-5 to expand “signs and symptoms” classification to incorporate biological measures may help the development of new multifactorial and dimensional models able to better understand the pathophysiology of psychiatric disorders and develop improved treatments. Finally, a better understanding on the significant response variability, cognitive functioning, role of comorbidities and treatment-resistant cases are critical for the development of prevention and intervention strategies that are more effective.