Mitja Bodatsch1, Anke Brockhaus-Dumke2, Joachim Klosterkötter3, Stephan Ruhrmann3. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne. Electronic address: mitja.bodatsch@uk-koeln.de. 2. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne; Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatic Medicine, Rheinhessen-Fachklinik Alzey, Alzey, Germany. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Prediction and prevention of psychosis have become major research topics. Clinical approaches warrant objective biological parameters to enhance validity in prediction of psychosis onset. In this regard, event-related potentials (ERPs) have been identified as promising tools for improving psychosis prediction. METHODS: Herein, the focus is on sensory gating, mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300, thereby discussing which parameters allow for a timely and valid detection of future converters to psychosis. In a first step, we systematically reviewed the studies that resulted from a search of the MEDLINE database. In a second step, we performed a meta-analysis of those investigations reporting transitions that statistically compared ERPs in converting versus nonconverting subjects. RESULTS: Sensory gating, MMN, and P300 have been demonstrated to be impaired in subjects clinically at risk of developing a psychotic disorder. In the meta-analysis, duration MMN achieved the highest effect size measures. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, MMN studies have produced the most convincing results until now, including independent replication of the predictive validity. However, a synopsis of the literature revealed a relative paucity of ERP studies addressing the psychosis risk state. Considering the high clinical relevance of valid psychosis prediction, future research should question for the most informative paradigms and should allow for meta-analytic evaluation with regard to specificity and sensitivity of the most appropriate parameters.
BACKGROUND: Prediction and prevention of psychosis have become major research topics. Clinical approaches warrant objective biological parameters to enhance validity in prediction of psychosis onset. In this regard, event-related potentials (ERPs) have been identified as promising tools for improving psychosis prediction. METHODS: Herein, the focus is on sensory gating, mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300, thereby discussing which parameters allow for a timely and valid detection of future converters to psychosis. In a first step, we systematically reviewed the studies that resulted from a search of the MEDLINE database. In a second step, we performed a meta-analysis of those investigations reporting transitions that statistically compared ERPs in converting versus nonconverting subjects. RESULTS: Sensory gating, MMN, and P300 have been demonstrated to be impaired in subjects clinically at risk of developing a psychotic disorder. In the meta-analysis, duration MMN achieved the highest effect size measures. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, MMN studies have produced the most convincing results until now, including independent replication of the predictive validity. However, a synopsis of the literature revealed a relative paucity of ERP studies addressing the psychosis risk state. Considering the high clinical relevance of valid psychosis prediction, future research should question for the most informative paradigms and should allow for meta-analytic evaluation with regard to specificity and sensitivity of the most appropriate parameters.
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: Migyung Lee; Andrea Balla; Henry Sershen; Pejman Sehatpour; Peter Lakatos; Daniel C Javitt Journal: Neuropsychopharmacology Date: 2017-08-17 Impact factor: 7.853
Authors: Luca Kleineidam; Ingo Frommann; Stephan Ruhrmann; Joachim Klosterkötter; Anke Brockhaus-Dumke; Wolfgang Wölwer; Wolfgang Gaebel; Wolfgang Maier; Michael Wagner; Ulrich Ettinger Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2019-01-11 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Holly K Hamilton; Scott W Woods; Brian J Roach; Katiah Llerena; Thomas H McGlashan; Vinod H Srihari; Judith M Ford; Daniel H Mathalon Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2019-09-11 Impact factor: 9.306
Authors: Antígona Martínez; Pablo A Gaspar; Steven A Hillyard; Søren K Andersen; Javier Lopez-Calderon; Cheryl M Corcoran; Daniel C Javitt Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Susanna L Fryer; Brian J Roach; Holly K Hamilton; Peter Bachman; Aysenil Belger; Ricardo E Carrión; Erica Duncan; Jason Johannesen; Gregory A Light; Margaret Niznikiewicz; Jean Addington; Carrie E Bearden; Kristin S Cadenhead; Tyrone D Cannon; Barbara A Cornblatt; Thomas H McGlashan; Diana O Perkins; Larry Seidman; Ming Tsuang; Elaine F Walker; Scott W Woods; Daniel H Mathalon Journal: J Abnorm Psychol Date: 2020-08
Authors: Daisuke Koshiyama; Michael L Thomas; Makoto Miyakoshi; Yash B Joshi; Juan L Molina; Kumiko Tanaka-Koshiyama; Joyce Sprock; David L Braff; Neal R Swerdlow; Gregory A Light Journal: Schizophr Bull Date: 2021-03-16 Impact factor: 9.306