Objective: Youth at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis often demonstrate significant negative symptoms, which have been reported to be predictive of conversion to psychosis and a reduced quality of life but treatment options for negative symptoms remain inadequate. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all intervention studies examining negative symptom outcomes in youth at CHR for psychosis. Method: The authors searched PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and EBM from inception to December 2016. Studies were selected if they included any intervention that reported follow-up negative symptoms in youth at CHR for psychosis. Treatment comparisons were evaluated using both pairwise and network meta-analyses. Due to the differences in negative symptom scales the effect sizes were reported as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Results: Of 3027 citations, 32 studies met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 2463 CHR participants. The null hypothesis was not rejected for any of the 11 treatments. N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptor (NMDAR) modulators trended toward a significant reduction in negative symptoms compared to placebo (SMD = -0.54; 95% CI = -1.09 to 0.02; I2 = 0%, P = .06). In respective order of descending effectiveness as per the treatment hierarchy, NMDAR modulators were more effective than family therapy, need-based interventions, risperidone, amisulpride, cognitive behavioral therapy, omega-3, olanzapine, supportive therapy, and integrated psychological interventions. Conclusions: Efficacy and effectiveness were not confirmed for any negative symptom treatment. Many studies had small samples and the majority were not designed to target negative symptoms.
Objective: Youth at clinical high risk (CHR) for psychosis often demonstrate significant negative symptoms, which have been reported to be predictive of conversion to psychosis and a reduced quality of life but treatment options for negative symptoms remain inadequate. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis of all intervention studies examining negative symptom outcomes in youth at CHR for psychosis. Method: The authors searched PsycINFO, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and EBM from inception to December 2016. Studies were selected if they included any intervention that reported follow-up negative symptoms in youth at CHR for psychosis. Treatment comparisons were evaluated using both pairwise and network meta-analyses. Due to the differences in negative symptom scales the effect sizes were reported as the standardized mean difference (SMD). Results: Of 3027 citations, 32 studies met our inclusion criteria, including a total of 2463 CHR participants. The null hypothesis was not rejected for any of the 11 treatments. N-methyl-D-aspartate-receptor (NMDAR) modulators trended toward a significant reduction in negative symptoms compared to placebo (SMD = -0.54; 95% CI = -1.09 to 0.02; I2 = 0%, P = .06). In respective order of descending effectiveness as per the treatment hierarchy, NMDAR modulators were more effective than family therapy, need-based interventions, risperidone, amisulpride, cognitive behavioral therapy, omega-3, olanzapine, supportive therapy, and integrated psychological interventions. Conclusions: Efficacy and effectiveness were not confirmed for any negative symptom treatment. Many studies had small samples and the majority were not designed to target negative symptoms.
Authors: Yulia Landa; Kim T Mueser; Katarzyna E Wyka; Erica Shreck; Rachel Jespersen; Michael A Jacobs; Kenneth W Griffin; Mark van der Gaag; Valerie F Reyna; Aaron T Beck; David A Silbersweig; John T Walkup Journal: Early Interv Psychiatry Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 2.732
Authors: G Paul Amminger; Miriam R Schäfer; Konstantinos Papageorgiou; Claudia M Klier; Sue M Cotton; Susan M Harrigan; Andrew Mackinnon; Patrick D McGorry; Gregor E Berger Journal: Arch Gen Psychiatry Date: 2010-02
Authors: Patrick D McGorry; Barnaby Nelson; Lisa J Phillips; Hok Pan Yuen; Shona M Francey; Annette Thampi; Gregor E Berger; G Paul Amminger; Magenta B Simmons; Daniel Kelly; Grad Dip; Andrew D Thompson; Alison R Yung Journal: J Clin Psychiatry Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 4.384
Authors: Scott W Woods; Barbara C Walsh; Keith A Hawkins; Tandy J Miller; John R Saksa; Deepak C D'Souza; Godfrey D Pearlson; Daniel C Javitt; Thomas H McGlashan; John H Krystal Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2012-10-22 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Joseph Firth; Scott B Teasdale; Kelly Allott; Dan Siskind; Wolfgang Marx; Jack Cotter; Nicola Veronese; Felipe Schuch; Lee Smith; Marco Solmi; André F Carvalho; Davy Vancampfort; Michael Berk; Brendon Stubbs; Jerome Sarris Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2019-10 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: D J Devoe; L Lu; T D Cannon; K S Cadenhead; B A Cornblatt; T H McGlashan; D O Perkins; L J Seidman; M T Tsuang; S W Woods; E F Walker; D H Mathalon; C E Bearden; J Addington Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2020-04-30 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Daniel J Hauke; André Schmidt; Erich Studerus; Christina Andreou; Anita Riecher-Rössler; Joaquim Radua; Joseph Kambeitz; Anne Ruef; Dominic B Dwyer; Lana Kambeitz-Ilankovic; Theresa Lichtenstein; Rachele Sanfelici; Nora Penzel; Shalaila S Haas; Linda A Antonucci; Paris Alexandros Lalousis; Katharine Chisholm; Frauke Schultze-Lutter; Stephan Ruhrmann; Jarmo Hietala; Paolo Brambilla; Nikolaos Koutsouleris; Eva Meisenzahl; Christos Pantelis; Marlene Rosen; Raimo K R Salokangas; Rachel Upthegrove; Stephen J Wood; Stefan Borgwardt Journal: Transl Psychiatry Date: 2021-05-24 Impact factor: 6.222
Authors: Gonzalo Salazar de Pablo; Filippo Besana; Vincenzo Arienti; Ana Catalan; Julio Vaquerizo-Serrano; Anna Cabras; Joana Pereira; Livia Soardo; Francesco Coronelli; Simi Kaur; Josette da Silva; Dominic Oliver; Natalia Petros; Carmen Moreno; Ana Gonzalez-Pinto; Covadonga M Díaz-Caneja; Jae Il Shin; Pierluigi Politi; Marco Solmi; Renato Borgatti; Martina Maria Mensi; Celso Arango; Christoph U Correll; Philip McGuire; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: EClinicalMedicine Date: 2021-06-16