S Leucht1, J M Davis, R R Engel, W Kissling, J M Kane. 1. Klinik für Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie der TU-München, Klinikum rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany. stefan.leucht@lrz.tum.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To review and make recommendations for the definition and presentation of the terms 'response' and 'remission' in schizophrenia. METHOD: Selective review of publications on definitions of response and remission in schizophrenia. RESULTS: When the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) or the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) are used for definitions of response, a cut-off of at least 50% reduction of the baseline score should be used for acutely ill, non-refractory patients and a cut-off of at least 25% reduction for refractory patients. When percentage BPRS/PANSS reduction is calculated, the 18/30 points minimum scores meaning 'no symptoms' on the should be subtracted. In addition, responder rates from 0-100% could be presented in a table in steps of 25%. For large and simple practical trials, the Clinical Global Impression scale with suggested improvements could be used 1-7 scale. CONCLUSION: To show how many patients are still symptomatic at the end of study and to show the overall amount of change in both remission and responder criteria should be presented.
OBJECTIVE: To review and make recommendations for the definition and presentation of the terms 'response' and 'remission' in schizophrenia. METHOD: Selective review of publications on definitions of response and remission in schizophrenia. RESULTS: When the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) or the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) are used for definitions of response, a cut-off of at least 50% reduction of the baseline score should be used for acutely ill, non-refractory patients and a cut-off of at least 25% reduction for refractory patients. When percentage BPRS/PANSS reduction is calculated, the 18/30 points minimum scores meaning 'no symptoms' on the should be subtracted. In addition, responder rates from 0-100% could be presented in a table in steps of 25%. For large and simple practical trials, the Clinical Global Impression scale with suggested improvements could be used 1-7 scale. CONCLUSION: To show how many patients are still symptomatic at the end of study and to show the overall amount of change in both remission and responder criteria should be presented.
Authors: Leandro da Costa Lane Valiengo; Stephan Goerigk; Pedro Caldana Gordon; Frank Padberg; Mauricio Henriques Serpa; Stephanie Koebe; Leonardo Afonso Dos Santos; Roger Alberto Marcos Lovera; Juliana Barbosa de Carvalho; Martinus van de Bilt; Acioly L T Lacerda; Helio Elkis; Wagner Farid Gattaz; Andre R Brunoni Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2020-02-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Rebecca Schennach; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Michael Obermeier; Florian Seemüller; Markus Jäger; Max Schmauss; Gerd Laux; Herbert Pfeiffer; Dieter Naber; Lutz G Schmidt; Wolfgang Gaebel; Joachim Klosterkötter; Isabella Heuser; Wolfgang Maier; Matthias R Lemke; Eckart Rüther; Stefan Klingberg; Markus Gastpar; Richard Musil; Ilja Spellmann; Michael Riedel Journal: Int J Methods Psychiatr Res Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 4.035
Authors: Venkatesh Pilla Reddy; Magdalena Kozielska; Martin Johnson; An Vermeulen; Rik de Greef; Jing Liu; Geny M M Groothuis; Meindert Danhof; Johannes H Proost Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2011-07 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: A Hasan; T Wobrock; B Guse; B Langguth; M Landgrebe; P Eichhammer; E Frank; J Cordes; W Wölwer; F Musso; G Winterer; W Gaebel; G Hajak; C Ohmann; P E Verde; M Rietschel; R Ahmed; W G Honer; P Dechent; B Malchow; M F U Castro; D Dwyer; C Cabral; P M Kreuzer; T B Poeppl; T Schneider-Axmann; P Falkai; N Koutsouleris Journal: Mol Psychiatry Date: 2016-10-11 Impact factor: 15.992
Authors: Eva J Brandl; Nabilah I Chowdhury; Arun K Tiwari; Tristram A P Lett; Herbert Y Meltzer; James L Kennedy; Daniel J Müller Journal: J Neural Transm (Vienna) Date: 2014-08-24 Impact factor: 3.575
Authors: Kinga Szymona; Barbara Zdzisińska; Hanna Karakuła-Juchnowicz; Tomasz Kocki; Martyna Kandefer-Szerszeń; Marta Flis; Wojciech Rosa; Ewa M Urbańska Journal: Neurotox Res Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 3.911
Authors: Theo G M van Erp; Adrian Preda; Dana Nguyen; Lawrence Faziola; Jessica Turner; Juan Bustillo; Aysenil Belger; Kelvin O Lim; Sarah McEwen; James Voyvodic; Daniel H Mathalon; Judith Ford; Steven G Potkin Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2013-12-11 Impact factor: 4.939