BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of psychosis development in high-risk populations is an important but thus far elusive goal. Of the many diverse etiologic and risk factors identified thus far, few have been combined into prospective multivariate risk ascertainment models. We tested the predictive power of familial, neurobiological, socioenvironmental, cognitive and clinical risk factors through an integrative biopsychosocial model for emerging psychosis in young relatives at familial risk for schizophrenia. METHODS: 96 young first- and second- degree relatives of schizophrenia probands were followed for an average of 2.38 (SD=0.98) years to examine their trajectory towards psychosis. Iterative structural equation modelling utilizing multiple etiologic and risk factors was employed to estimate their joint contribution to prediction of psychosis development. RESULTS: The rate of conversion to psychosis over the study period was 12.5%. In the final model, clinical measures of schizotypy were directly predictive of conversion, with early (familial, biological, socioenvironmental) and cognitive risk factors indirectly predictive of psychosis through increased baseline clinical symptomatology. Our model provided an excellent fit to the observed data, with sensitivity of 0.17, specificity of 0.99, positive predictive value of 0.67 and negative predictive value of 0.89. CONCLUSIONS: Integrative modeling of multivariate data from familial, neurobiological, socioenvironmental, cognitive and clinical domains represents a powerful approach to prediction of psychosis development. The high specificity and low sensitivity found using a combination of such variables suggests that their utility may be in confirmatory testing among already selected high-risk individuals, rather than for initial screening. These findings also highlight the importance of data from a broad array of etiologic and risk factors, even within a familial high-risk population. With further refinement and validation, such methods could form key components of early detection, intervention and prevention programs.
BACKGROUND: Accurate prediction of psychosis development in high-risk populations is an important but thus far elusive goal. Of the many diverse etiologic and risk factors identified thus far, few have been combined into prospective multivariate risk ascertainment models. We tested the predictive power of familial, neurobiological, socioenvironmental, cognitive and clinical risk factors through an integrative biopsychosocial model for emerging psychosis in young relatives at familial risk for schizophrenia. METHODS: 96 young first- and second- degree relatives of schizophrenia probands were followed for an average of 2.38 (SD=0.98) years to examine their trajectory towards psychosis. Iterative structural equation modelling utilizing multiple etiologic and risk factors was employed to estimate their joint contribution to prediction of psychosis development. RESULTS: The rate of conversion to psychosis over the study period was 12.5%. In the final model, clinical measures of schizotypy were directly predictive of conversion, with early (familial, biological, socioenvironmental) and cognitive risk factors indirectly predictive of psychosis through increased baseline clinical symptomatology. Our model provided an excellent fit to the observed data, with sensitivity of 0.17, specificity of 0.99, positive predictive value of 0.67 and negative predictive value of 0.89. CONCLUSIONS: Integrative modeling of multivariate data from familial, neurobiological, socioenvironmental, cognitive and clinical domains represents a powerful approach to prediction of psychosis development. The high specificity and low sensitivity found using a combination of such variables suggests that their utility may be in confirmatory testing among already selected high-risk individuals, rather than for initial screening. These findings also highlight the importance of data from a broad array of etiologic and risk factors, even within a familial high-risk population. With further refinement and validation, such methods could form key components of early detection, intervention and prevention programs.
Authors: Shaun M Eack; Konasale M R Prasad; Debra M Montrose; Dhruman D Goradia; Diana Dworakowski; Jean Miewald; Matcheri S Keshavan Journal: Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry Date: 2008-09-09 Impact factor: 5.067
Authors: Mark J Millan; Annie Andrieux; George Bartzokis; Kristin Cadenhead; Paola Dazzan; Paolo Fusar-Poli; Jürgen Gallinat; Jay Giedd; Dennis R Grayson; Markus Heinrichs; René Kahn; Marie-Odile Krebs; Marion Leboyer; David Lewis; Oscar Marin; Philippe Marin; Andreas Meyer-Lindenberg; Patrick McGorry; Philip McGuire; Michael J Owen; Paul Patterson; Akira Sawa; Michael Spedding; Peter Uhlhaas; Flora Vaccarino; Claes Wahlestedt; Daniel Weinberger Journal: Nat Rev Drug Discov Date: 2016-03-04 Impact factor: 84.694
Authors: Daniel H Wolf; Theodore D Satterthwaite; Monica E Calkins; Kosha Ruparel; Mark A Elliott; Ryan D Hopson; Chad T Jackson; Karthik Prabhakaran; Warren B Bilker; Hakon Hakonarson; Ruben C Gur; Raquel E Gur Journal: JAMA Psychiatry Date: 2015-05 Impact factor: 21.596
Authors: David R Roalf; Megan Quarmley; Monica E Calkins; Theodore D Satterthwaite; Kosha Ruparel; Mark A Elliott; Tyler M Moore; Ruben C Gur; Raquel E Gur; Paul J Moberg; Bruce I Turetsky Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2017-05-01 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Triptish Bhatia; Elizabeth A Gettig; Irving I Gottesman; Jonathan Berliner; N N Mishra; Vishwajit L Nimgaonkar; Smita N Deshpande Journal: Asian J Psychiatr Date: 2016-08-21
Authors: Jai L Shah; Neeraj Tandon; Debra M Montrose; Diana Mermon; Shaun M Eack; Jean Miewald; Matcheri S Keshavan Journal: Early Interv Psychiatry Date: 2017-09-07 Impact factor: 2.732