Literature DB >> 24914177

Detecting the psychosis prodrome across high-risk populations using neuroanatomical biomarkers.

Nikolaos Koutsouleris1, Anita Riecher-Rössler2, Eva M Meisenzahl3, Renata Smieskova2, Erich Studerus2, Lana Kambeitz-Ilankovic3, Sebastian von Saldern3, Carlos Cabral3, Maximilian Reiser4, Peter Falkai3, Stefan Borgwardt2.   

Abstract

To date, the MRI-based individualized prediction of psychosis has only been demonstrated in single-site studies. It remains unclear if MRI biomarkers generalize across different centers and MR scanners and represent accurate surrogates of the risk for developing this devastating illness. Therefore, we assessed whether a MRI-based prediction system identified patients with a later disease transition among 73 clinically defined high-risk persons recruited at two different early recognition centers. Prognostic performance was measured using cross-validation, independent test validation, and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis. Transition outcomes were correctly predicted in 80% of test cases (sensitivity: 76%, specificity: 85%, positive likelihood ratio: 5.1). Thus, given a 54-month transition risk of 45% across both centers, MRI-based predictors provided a 36%-increase of prognostic certainty. After stratifying individuals into low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups using the predictor's decision score, the high- vs low-risk groups had median psychosis-free survival times of 5 vs 51 months and transition rates of 88% vs 8%. The predictor's decision function involved gray matter volume alterations in prefrontal, perisylvian, and subcortical structures. Our results support the existence of a cross-center neuroanatomical signature of emerging psychosis enabling individualized risk staging across different high-risk populations. Supplementary results revealed that (1) potentially confounding between-site differences were effectively mitigated using statistical correction methods, and (2) the detection of the prodromal signature considerably depended on the available sample sizes. These observations pave the way for future multicenter studies, which may ultimately facilitate the neurobiological refinement of risk criteria and personalized preventive therapies based on individualized risk profiling tools.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Maryland Psychiatric Research Center. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  cross-center; individualized risk stratification; machine learning; neuroanatomical biomarker

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24914177      PMCID: PMC4332937          DOI: 10.1093/schbul/sbu078

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Schizophr Bull        ISSN: 0586-7614            Impact factor:   9.306


  64 in total

1.  Why voxel-based morphometric analysis should be used with great caution when characterizing group differences.

Authors:  Christos Davatzikos
Journal:  Neuroimage       Date:  2004-09       Impact factor: 6.556

2.  Disease prediction in the at-risk mental state for psychosis using neuroanatomical biomarkers: results from the FePsy study.

Authors:  Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Stefan Borgwardt; Eva M Meisenzahl; Ronald Bottlender; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Anita Riecher-Rössler
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 9.306

3.  Neuroanatomical correlates of executive dysfunction in the at-risk mental state for psychosis.

Authors:  Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Katja Patschurek-Kliche; Johanna Scheuerecker; Petra Decker; Ronald Bottlender; Gisela Schmitt; Dan Rujescu; Ina Giegling; Christian Gaser; Maximilian Reiser; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Eva M Meisenzahl
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2010-09-09       Impact factor: 4.939

4.  Randomized-controlled trials in people at ultra high risk of psychosis: a review of treatment effectiveness.

Authors:  Antonio Preti; Matteo Cella
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2010-08-21       Impact factor: 4.939

Review 5.  Diagnostics and biomarker development: priming the pipeline.

Authors:  Kathryn A Phillips; Stephanie Van Bebber; Amalia M Issa
Journal:  Nat Rev Drug Discov       Date:  2006-05-19       Impact factor: 84.694

6.  Early recognition and disease prediction in the at-risk mental states for psychosis using neurocognitive pattern classification.

Authors:  Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Christos Davatzikos; Ronald Bottlender; Katja Patschurek-Kliche; Johanna Scheuerecker; Petra Decker; Christian Gaser; Hans-Jürgen Möller; Eva M Meisenzahl
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2011-05-16       Impact factor: 9.306

Review 7.  Chances and risks of predicting psychosis.

Authors:  Stephan Ruhrmann; Joachim Klosterkötter; Mitja Bodatsch; Alexandra Nikolaides; Dominika Julkowski; Desire Hilboll; Frauke Schultz-Lutter
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 5.270

8.  Neuroanatomical maps of psychosis onset: voxel-wise meta-analysis of antipsychotic-naive VBM studies.

Authors:  Paolo Fusar-Poli; Joaquim Radua; Philip McGuire; Stefan Borgwardt
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2011-11-10       Impact factor: 9.306

9.  The basal ganglia communicate with the cerebellum.

Authors:  Andreea C Bostan; Richard P Dum; Peter L Strick
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2010-04-19       Impact factor: 11.205

10.  Diagnosing schizophrenia in the initial prodromal phase.

Authors:  J Klosterkötter; M Hellmich; E M Steinmeyer; F Schultze-Lutter
Journal:  Arch Gen Psychiatry       Date:  2001-02
View more
  44 in total

1.  At risk or not at risk? A meta-analysis of the prognostic accuracy of psychometric interviews for psychosis prediction.

Authors:  Paolo Fusar-Poli; Marco Cappucciati; Grazia Rutigliano; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Ilaria Bonoldi; Stefan Borgwardt; Anita Riecher-Rössler; Jean Addington; Diana Perkins; Scott W Woods; Thomas H McGlashan; Jimmy Lee; Joachim Klosterkötter; Alison R Yung; Philip McGuire
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2015-10       Impact factor: 49.548

2.  Emotion recognition deficits as predictors of transition in individuals at clinical high risk for schizophrenia: a neurodevelopmental perspective.

Authors:  C M Corcoran; J G Keilp; J Kayser; C Klim; P D Butler; G E Bruder; R C Gur; D C Javitt
Journal:  Psychol Med       Date:  2015-06-04       Impact factor: 7.723

3.  Individual prediction of long-term outcome in adolescents at ultra-high risk for psychosis: Applying machine learning techniques to brain imaging data.

Authors:  Sanne de Wit; Tim B Ziermans; M Nieuwenhuis; Patricia F Schothorst; Herman van Engeland; René S Kahn; Sarah Durston; Hugo G Schnack
Journal:  Hum Brain Mapp       Date:  2016-10-04       Impact factor: 5.038

4.  Social reward processing: A biomarker for predicting psychosis risk?

Authors:  Andrea Pelletier-Baldelli; Joseph M Orr; Jessica A Bernard; Vijay A Mittal
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2018-08-07       Impact factor: 4.939

5.  Prediction and prevention of psychosis: current progress and future tasks.

Authors:  Stephan Ruhrmann; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Stefanie J Schmidt; Nathalie Kaiser; Joachim Klosterkötter
Journal:  Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 5.270

6.  Prediction Models of Functional Outcomes for Individuals in the Clinical High-Risk State for Psychosis or With Recent-Onset Depression: A Multimodal, Multisite Machine Learning Analysis.

Authors:  Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Lana Kambeitz-Ilankovic; Stephan Ruhrmann; Marlene Rosen; Anne Ruef; Dominic B Dwyer; Marco Paolini; Katharine Chisholm; Joseph Kambeitz; Theresa Haidl; André Schmidt; John Gillam; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Peter Falkai; Maximilian Reiser; Anita Riecher-Rössler; Rachel Upthegrove; Jarmo Hietala; Raimo K R Salokangas; Christos Pantelis; Eva Meisenzahl; Stephen J Wood; Dirk Beque; Paolo Brambilla; Stefan Borgwardt
Journal:  JAMA Psychiatry       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 21.596

7.  Is neuroimaging clinically useful in subjects at high risk for psychosis?

Authors:  Stefan Borgwardt; André Schmidt
Journal:  World Psychiatry       Date:  2016-06       Impact factor: 49.548

Review 8.  Brain Biomarkers of Vulnerability and Progression to Psychosis.

Authors:  Tyrone D Cannon
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2015-12-09       Impact factor: 9.306

9.  Impaired Sensorimotor Gating Using the Acoustic Prepulse Inhibition Paradigm in Individuals at a Clinical High Risk for Psychosis.

Authors:  Qijing Bo; Zhen Mao; Qing Tian; Ningbo Yang; Xianbin Li; Fang Dong; Fuchun Zhou; Liang Li; Chuanyue Wang
Journal:  Schizophr Bull       Date:  2021-01-23       Impact factor: 9.306

10.  Premorbid multivariate prediction of adult psychosis-spectrum disorder: A high-risk prospective investigation.

Authors:  Jason Schiffman; Emily Kline; Nicole D Jameson; Holger J Sorensen; Shana Dodge; Thomas Tsuji; Erik L Mortensen; Sarnoff A Mednick
Journal:  Schizophr Res       Date:  2015-07-23       Impact factor: 4.939

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.