BACKGROUND: There has been recent optimism with regard to improving the predictive validity of those individuals who develop a psychotic disorder from the "Ultra High Risk" (UHR) or putatively prodromal population using combinations of clinical variables. We aimed to test the recent results from a large collaborative consortium in an independent cohort from the PACE (Personal Assistance and Clinical Evaluation) clinic in Australia. METHOD: The North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS) consortium study reported 5 important clinical predictive variables within their US sample of UHR patients: genetic risk with functional decline; high unusual thought content score; high suspicion/paranoia score; low social functioning and history of substance abuse. We examined the predictive validity of these variables using data from a cohort of 104 UHR patients from the PACE clinic in Melbourne, Australia. Cox regression was used to explore the relationship between these variables at baseline and transition to psychosis by 28months. RESULTS: Three of the five variables were found to be associated with transition in our sample: high unusual thought content scores; low functioning; and having genetic risk with functional decline. A combination of two out of three of these features produced a reasonable predictive validity (positive predictive value (PPV) 65.4%, sensitivity 37.3%, and specificity 87.2%) but with overall lower PPVs than that reported by the NAPLS consortium. CONCLUSIONS: Three out of five of the identified clinical predictors for transition to psychosis from the NAPLS study were replicated in an independent sample. Using a combination of clinical variables the predictive validity of determining whether a UHR individual develops a psychotic disorder was improved above UHR criteria alone. Although psychosis prediction is improved using this model, the probability of a person not developing psychotic disorder is still quite high at 35%. Crown
BACKGROUND: There has been recent optimism with regard to improving the predictive validity of those individuals who develop a psychotic disorder from the "Ultra High Risk" (UHR) or putatively prodromal population using combinations of clinical variables. We aimed to test the recent results from a large collaborative consortium in an independent cohort from the PACE (Personal Assistance and Clinical Evaluation) clinic in Australia. METHOD: The North American Prodrome Longitudinal Study (NAPLS) consortium study reported 5 important clinical predictive variables within their US sample of UHR patients: genetic risk with functional decline; high unusual thought content score; high suspicion/paranoia score; low social functioning and history of substance abuse. We examined the predictive validity of these variables using data from a cohort of 104 UHR patients from the PACE clinic in Melbourne, Australia. Cox regression was used to explore the relationship between these variables at baseline and transition to psychosis by 28months. RESULTS: Three of the five variables were found to be associated with transition in our sample: high unusual thought content scores; low functioning; and having genetic risk with functional decline. A combination of two out of three of these features produced a reasonable predictive validity (positive predictive value (PPV) 65.4%, sensitivity 37.3%, and specificity 87.2%) but with overall lower PPVs than that reported by the NAPLS consortium. CONCLUSIONS: Three out of five of the identified clinical predictors for transition to psychosis from the NAPLS study were replicated in an independent sample. Using a combination of clinical variables the predictive validity of determining whether a UHR individual develops a psychotic disorder was improved above UHR criteria alone. Although psychosis prediction is improved using this model, the probability of a person not developing psychotic disorder is still quite high at 35%. Crown
Authors: Neeraj Tandon; Debra Montrose; Jai Shah; R P Rajarethinam; Vaibhav A Diwadkar; Matcheri S Keshavan Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2011-11-04 Impact factor: 4.791
Authors: Sarah I Tarbox; Jean Addington; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Diana O Perkins; Larry J Seidman; Ming T Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Robert Heinssen; Thomas H McGlashan; Scott W Woods Journal: Psychiatry Res Date: 2013-10-18 Impact factor: 3.222
Authors: T H Zhang; H J Li; K A Woodberry; L H Xu; Y Y Tang; Q Guo; H R Cui; X H Liu; A Chow; C B Li; K D Jiang; Z P Xiao; L J Seidman; J J Wang Journal: Epidemiol Psychiatr Sci Date: 2016-04-08 Impact factor: 6.892
Authors: Barbara A Cornblatt; Ricardo E Carrión; Andrea Auther; Danielle McLaughlin; Ruth H Olsen; Majnu John; Christoph U Correll Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2015-06-05 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Yoonho Chung; Aron Jacobson; George He; Theo G M van Erp; Sarah McEwen; Jean Addington; Carrie E Bearden; Kristin Cadenhead; Barbara Cornblatt; Daniel H Mathalon; Thomas McGlashan; Diana Perkins; Larry J Seidman; Ming Tsuang; Elaine Walker; Scott W Woods; Robert Heinssen; Tyrone D Cannon Journal: Mol Neuropsychiatry Date: 2015-05-01
Authors: Charity J Morgan; Michael J Coleman; Ayse Ulgen; Lenore Boling; Jonathan O Cole; Frederick V Johnson; Jan Lerbinger; J Alexander Bodkin; Philip S Holzman; Deborah L Levy Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Paolo Fusar-Poli; Stefan Borgwardt; Andreas Bechdolf; Jean Addington; Anita Riecher-Rössler; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Matcheri Keshavan; Stephen Wood; Stephan Ruhrmann; Larry J Seidman; Lucia Valmaggia; Tyrone Cannon; Eva Velthorst; Lieuwe De Haan; Barbara Cornblatt; Ilaria Bonoldi; Max Birchwood; Thomas McGlashan; William Carpenter; Patrick McGorry; Joachim Klosterkötter; Philip McGuire; Alison Yung Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2013-01 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: Jai Shah; Shaun M Eack; Debra M Montrose; Neeraj Tandon; Jean M Miewald; Konasale M Prasad; Matcheri S Keshavan Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2012-09-23 Impact factor: 4.939