General distress, hopelessness—suicidal ideation and worrying in adolescence: Concurrent and predictive validity of a symptom-level bifactor model for clinical diagnoses

BACKGROUND: Clinical disorders often share common symptoms and aetiological factors. Bifactor models acknowledge the role of an underlying general distress component and more specific sub-domains of psychopathology which specify the unique components of disorders over and above a general factor. METHODS: A bifactor model jointly calibrated data on subjective distress from The Mood and Feelings Questionnaire and the Revised Children's Manifest Anxiety Scale. The bifactor model encompassed a general distress factor, and specific factors for (a) hopelessness-suicidal ideation, (b) generalised worrying and (c) restlessness-fatigue at age 14 which were related to lifetime clinical diagnoses established by interviews at ages 14 (concurrent validity) and current diagnoses at 17 years (predictive validity) in a British population sample of 1159 adolescents. RESULTS: Diagnostic interviews confirmed the validity of a symptom-level bifactor model. The underlying general distress factor was a powerful but non-specific predictor of affective, anxiety and behaviour disorders. The specific factors for hopelessness-suicidal ideation and generalised worrying contributed to predictive specificity. Hopelessness-suicidal ideation predicted concurrent and future affective disorder; generalised worrying predicted concurrent and future anxiety, specifically concurrent generalised anxiety disorders. Generalised worrying was negatively associated with behaviour disorders. LIMITATIONS: The analyses of gender differences and the prediction of specific disorders was limited due to a low frequency of disorders other than depression. CONCLUSIONS: The bifactor model was able to differentiate concurrent and predict future clinical diagnoses. This can inform the development of targeted as well as non-specific interventions for prevention and treatment of different disorders.

Enduring effects of evidence-based psychotherapies in acute depression and anxiety disorders versus treatment as usual at follow-up — A longitudinal meta-analysis

This meta-analysis examined the enduring efficacy of evidence-based psychotherapies (EBP) in comparison to treatment as usual (TAU) by examining effects from termination to follow-up for acute anxiety and depression in an adult outpatient population. It was hypothesized that EBPs might extend their efficacy at follow-up assessment (Tolin, 2010). METHOD: Longitudinal multilevel meta-analyses were conducted that examined the magnitude of difference between EBP and TAU. Targeted (disorder-specific) outcomes were examined, along with dropout rates at follow-up assessments. RESULTS: A total of 15 comparisons (including 30 repeated effect sizes [ES]) were included in this meta-analysis (average of 8.9 month follow-up). Small to moderate ES differences were found to be in favor of EBPs at 0-4 month assessments (Hedges' g=0.40) and up to 12-18 month assessments (g=0.20), indicating no extended efficacy at follow-up. However, the TAU-conditions were heterogeneous, ranging from absence of minimal mental health treatment to legitimate psychotherapeutic interventions provided by trained professionals, the latter of which resulted in smaller ES differences. Furthermore, samples where substance use comorbidities were not actively excluded indicated smaller ES differences. TAU-conditions produced slightly higher dropout rates than EBP-conditions. CONCLUSION: Findings indicate small and no extended superiority of EBP for acute depression and anxiety disorders in comparison to TAU at follow-up assessment. There are a limited number of studies investigating the transportability and lasting efficacy of EBP compared to TAU, especially to TAU with equivalent conditions between treatment groups.

Taking personalized medicine seriously: Biomarker approaches in phase IIb/III studies in major depression and schizophrenia

The success rate in the development of psychopharmacological compounds is insufficient. Two main reasons for failure have been frequently identified: 1) treating the wrong patients and 2) using the wrong dose. This is potentially based on the known heterogeneity among patients, both on a syndromal and a biological level. A focus on personalized medicine through better characterization with biomarkers has been successful in other therapeutic areas. Nevertheless, obstacles toward this goal that exist are 1) the perception of a lack of validation, 2) the perception of an expensive and complicated enterprise, and 3) the perception of regulatory hurdles. The authors tackle these concerns and focus on the utilization of biomarkers as predictive markers for treatment outcome. The authors primarily cover examples from the areas of major depression and schizophrenia. Methodologies covered include salivary and plasma collection of neuroendocrine, metabolic, and inflammatory markers, which identified subgroups of patients in the Netherlands Study of Depression and Anxiety. A battery of vegetative markers, including sleep-electroencephalography parameters, heart rate variability, and bedside functional tests, can be utilized to characterize the activity of a functional system that is related to treatment refractoriness in depression (e.g., the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system). Actigraphy and skin conductance can be utilized to classify patients with schizophrenia and provide objective readouts for vegetative activation as a functional marker of target engagement. Genetic markers, related to folate metabolism, or folate itself, has prognostic value for the treatment response in patients with schizophrenia. Already, several biomarkers are routinely collected in standard clinical trials (e.g., blood pressure and plasma electrolytes), and appear to be differentiating factors for treatment outcome. Given the availability of a wide variety of markers, the further development and integration of such markers into clinical research is both required and feasible in order to meet the benefit of personalized medicine. This article is based on proceedings from the "Taking Personalized Medicine Seriously-Biomarker Approaches in Phase IIb/III Studies in Major Depression and Schizophrenia" session, which was held during the 10th Annual Scientific Meeting of the International Society for Clinical Trials Meeting (ISCTM) in Washington, DC, February 18 to 20, 2014.

Psychomotor retardation is linked to frontal alpha asymmetry in major depression

BACKGROUND Psychomotor disturbances are a main clinical feature of major depressive disorder (MDD) but little is known about their EEG signature. One of the most replicated EEG findings in MDD is resting frontal asymmetry in the alpha band (FAA), which is thought to be a correlate of withdrawal behavior and reduced approach motivation. The purpose of this study was to assess psychomotor alterations, alpha band power, FAA and investigate the association between them. METHODS 20 MDD patients and 19 healthy subjects were enrolled. Alpha power and FAA scores were calculated from a resting state EEG. Wrist actigraphy was recorded from the non-dominant arm for 24 h and activity level scores (AL) were extrapolated from the wakeful periods. RESULTS MDD patients had a left-lateralized frontal alpha activity and lower AL scores when compared to healthy subjects. A significant correlation was found between mean FAA and AL scores. A negative covariance between power in the lower alpha range and AL scores over the motor cortex bilaterally was detected. LIMITATIONS Relatively small sample size. Patients were pharmacologically treated with antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS This study replicates the finding of left-lateralized FAA and lower AL scores in MDD patients, and establishes the first evidence of significant correlations between alpha power, FAA scores and measures of motor activity, which may be interpreted as an expression of impaired motivational drive in MDD.

EEG marker of inhibitory brain activity correlates with resting-state cerebral blood flow in the reward system in major depression

Frontal alpha band asymmetry (FAA) is a marker of altered reward processing in major depressive disorder (MDD), associated with reduced approach behavior and withdrawal. However, its association with brain metabolism remains unclear. The aim of this study is to investigate FAA and its correlation with resting – state cerebral blood flow (rCBF). We hypothesized an association of FAA with regional rCBF in brain regions relevant for reward processing and motivated behavior, such as the striatum. We enrolled 20 patients and 19 healthy subjects. FAA scores and rCBF were quantified with the use of EEG and arterial spin labeling. Correlations of the two were evaluated, as well as the association with FAA and psychometric assessments of motivated behavior and anhedonia. Patients showed a left – lateralized pattern of frontal alpha activity and a correlation of FAA lateralization with subscores of Hamilton Depression Rating Scale linked to motivated behavior. An association of rCBF and FAA scores was found in clusters in the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex bilaterally (patients) and in the left medial frontal gyrus, in the right caudate head and in the right inferior parietal lobule (whole group). No correlations were found in healthy controls. Higher inhibitory right – lateralized alpha power was associated with lower rCBF values in prefrontal and striatal regions, predominantly in the right hemisphere, which are involved in the processing of motivated behavior and reward. Inhibitory brain activity in the reward system may contribute to some of the motivational problems observed in MDD.

Clinical and inflammatory characteristics of the European U-BIOPRED adult severe asthma cohort

U-BIOPRED is a European Union consortium of 20 academic institutions, 11 pharmaceutical companies and six patient organisations with the objective of improving the understanding of asthma disease mechanisms using a systems biology approach.This cross-sectional assessment of adults with severe asthma, mild/moderate asthma and healthy controls from 11 European countries consisted of analyses of patient-reported outcomes, lung function, blood and airway inflammatory measurements.Patients with severe asthma (nonsmokers, n=311; smokers/ex-smokers, n=110) had more symptoms and exacerbations compared to patients with mild/moderate disease (n=88) (2.5 exacerbations versus 0.4 in the preceding 12 months; p<0.001), with worse quality of life, and higher levels of anxiety and depression. They also had a higher incidence of nasal polyps and gastro-oesophageal reflux with lower lung function. Sputum eosinophil count was higher in severe asthma compared to mild/moderate asthma (median count 2.99% versus 1.05%; p=0.004) despite treatment with higher doses of inhaled and/or oral corticosteroids.Consistent with other severe asthma cohorts, U-BIOPRED is characterised by poor symptom control, increased comorbidity and airway inflammation, despite high levels of treatment. It is well suited to identify asthma phenotypes using the array of "omic" datasets that are at the core of this systems medicine approach.

European Psychiatric Association Guidance on psychotherapy in chronic depression across Europe

PURPOSE: Patients with chronic depression (CD) by definition respond less well to standard forms of psychotherapy and are more likely to be high utilizers of psychiatric resources. Therefore, the aim of this guidance paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of current psychotherapy for CD. The evidence of efficacy is critically reviewed and recommendations for clinical applications and research are given. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search to identify studies on psychotherapy in CD, evaluated the retrieved documents and developed evidence tables and recommendations through a consensus process among experts and stakeholders. RESULTS: We developed 5 recommendations which may help providers to select psychotherapeutic treatment options for this patient group. The EPA considers both psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy to be effective in CD and recommends both approaches. The best effect is achieved by combined treatment with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy, which should therefore be the treatment of choice. The EPA recommends psychotherapy with an interpersonal focus (e.g. the Cognitive Behavioural Analysis System of Psychotherapy [CBASP]) for the treatment of CD and a personalized approach based on the patient's preferences. DISCUSSION: The DSM-5 nomenclature of persistent depressive disorder (PDD), which includes CD subtypes, has been an important step towards a more differentiated treatment and understanding of these complex affective disorders. Apart from dysthymia, ICD-10 still does not provide a separate entity for a chronic course of depression. The differences between patients with acute episodic depression and those with CD need to be considered in the planning of treatment. Specific psychotherapeutic treatment options are recommended for patients with CD. CONCLUSION: Patients with chronic forms of depression should be offered tailored psychotherapeutic treatments that address their specific needs and deficits. Combination treatment with psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy is the first-line treatment recommended for CD. More research is needed to develop more effective treatments for CD, especially in the longer term, and to identify which patients benefit from which treatment algorithm.