Search

Background: Treatment resistance is a significant problem among young people experiencing moderate-to-severe anxiety, affecting nearly half of all patients. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of cannabidiol (CBD), a non-intoxicating component of Cannabis sativa , for anxiety disorders in young people who previously failed to respond to standard treatment., Methods: In this open-label trial, 31 young people aged 12-25 years with a DSM-5 anxiety disorder and no clinical improvement despite treatment with cognitive-behavioral therapy and/or antidepressant medication were enrolled between May 16, 2018, and June 28, 2019. All participants received add-on CBD for 12 weeks on a fixed-flexible schedule titrated up to 800 mg/d. The primary outcome was improvement in anxiety severity, measured with the Overall Anxiety Severity and Impairment Scale (OASIS), at week 12. Secondary outcomes included comorbid depressive symptoms, Clinical Global Impressions scale (CGI) score, and social and occupational functioning., Results: Mean (SD) OASIS scores decreased from 10.8 (3.8) at baseline to 6.3 (4.5) at week 12, corresponding to a -42.6% reduction ( P  < .0001). Depressive symptoms ( P  < .0001), CGI-Severity scale scores ( P  = .0008), and functioning ( P  = .04) improved significantly. Adverse events were reported in 25 (80.6%) of 31 participants and included fatigue, low mood, and hot flushes or cold chills. There were no serious and/or unexpected adverse events., Conclusions: These findings suggest that CBD can reduce anxiety severity and has an adequate safety profile in young people with treatment-resistant anxiety disorders. Randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm the efficacy and longer-term safety of this compound., Trial R egistration: New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) identifier: ACTRN12617000825358., (© Copyright 2022 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: The ultra-high risk clinical phenotype is associated with substantial distress and functional impairment and confers a greatly enhanced risk for transition to full-threshold psychosis. A range of interventions aimed at relieving current symptoms and functional impairment and reducing the risk of transition to psychosis has shown promising results, but the optimal type and sequence of intervention remain to be established. The aim of this study was to determine which intervention was most effective at preventing transition to psychosis: cognitive therapy plus low-dose risperidone, cognitive therapy plus placebo, or supportive therapy plus placebo., Method: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled 12-month trial of low-dose risperidone, cognitive therapy, or supportive therapy was conducted in a cohort of 115 clients of the Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation Clinic, a specialized service for young people at ultra-high risk of psychosis located in Melbourne, Australia. Recruitment commenced in August 2000 and ended in May 2006. The primary outcome measure was transition to full-threshold psychosis, defined a priori as frank psychotic symptoms occurring at least daily for 1 week or more and assessed using the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States. Secondary outcome measures were psychiatric symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and quality of life., Results: The estimated 12-month transition rates were as follows: cognitive therapy + risperidone, 10.7%; cognitive therapy + placebo, 9.6%; and supportive therapy + placebo, 21.8%. While there were no statistically significant differences between the 3 groups in transition rates (log-rank test P = .60), all 3 groups improved substantially during the trial, particularly in terms of negative symptoms and overall functioning., Conclusions: The lower than expected, essentially equivalent transition rates in all 3 groups fail to provide support for the first-line use of antipsychotic medications in patients at ultra-high risk of psychosis, and an initial approach with supportive therapy is likely to be effective and carries fewer risks., (© Copyright 2013 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Cognitive therapy and/or low-dose antipsychotic administered during the prodromal phase of schizophrenia may prevent or delay the onset of full-blown illness. However, it is unclear which of these treatments are most effective, how long treatment should be given, and whether effects will be sustained over a prolonged period., Method: In order to examine these issues, we conducted a randomized controlled trial of cognitive therapy + risperidone; cognitive therapy + placebo; and supportive therapy + placebo in young people at ultra high risk for developing a psychotic disorder (that is, putatively prodromal). The main outcome was transition to psychotic disorder, with level of symptoms and functioning the secondary outcomes. This article reports the interim 6-month follow-up results. The study was conducted from August 2000 to May 2007., Results: Of a possible 464 eligible ultra high risk individuals, 115 were recruited to the randomized controlled trial (cognitive therapy + risperidone, n = 43; cognitive therapy + placebo, n = 44; and supportive therapy + placebo, n = 28). An additional 78 individuals agreed to follow-up assessments but not to randomization ("monitoring group," n = 78). At 6 months, 8 of the 115 participants (7.0%) and 4 of the monitoring group (5.1%) had developed psychotic disorder. There were no significant differences between the 3 randomized groups (log rank test, P = .92) or between all 4 groups (log rank test, P = .93). There was also no difference between the 4 groups in secondary measures, with all groups showing a reduction in symptoms and increased functioning., Conclusions: Rates of transition to psychosis were lower than expected, particularly in the control supportive therapy + placebo group. This may have accounted for the negative finding, as the sample was therefore underpowered to find any difference between groups. Alternatively, it may be that all treatments were equally effective or equally ineffective at 6 months., Trial Registration: http://www.anzctr.org.au Identifier: ACTRN012605000247673., (© Copyright 2011 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To describe the longer-term clinical and functional outcome of a large, epidemiologic representative cohort of individuals experiencing a first episode of psychosis., Method: A naturalistic, prospective follow-up of an epidemiologic sample of 723 consecutive first-episode psychosis patients, followed between January 1998 and April 2005, at a median of 7.4 years after initial presentation to the Early Psychosis Prevention and Intervention Centre (EPPIC) in Melbourne, Australia. EPPIC is a frontline public mental health early psychosis program, servicing a geographically defined catchment area with a population of about 800,000 people. The main outcome measures included the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Schedule for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms, the Beck Depression Inventory, the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale, the Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale, the Quality of Life Scale, and the remission criteria developed by the Remission in Schizophrenia Working Group., Results: Follow-up information was collected on up to 90.0% (n = 651) of the baseline cohort of 723 participants, with 66.9% (n = 484) interviewed. In the last 2 years, 57% of individuals with schizophrenia/schizophreniform, 54% with schizoaffective disorder, 62% with affective psychosis, and 68% with other psychotic disorders reported some paid employment. Depending upon the criteria applied, symptomatic remission at follow-up was observed in 37%-59% of the cohort. Social/vocational recovery was observed in 31% of the cohort. Approximately a quarter achieved both symptomatic remission and social/vocational recovery., Conclusion: The relatively positive outcomes are consistent with a beneficial effect of specialized early intervention programs; however it is premature to draw firm conclusions. There was no control group and there are many differences between the relevant comparison studies and the present one. Although difficult to conduct, large scale controlled health services research trials are required to definitively determine the impact and optimal duration of specialized early psychosis programs., (2010 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: Over the last 15 years, a focus on early intervention in psychotic disorders has emerged. Initially, the early psychosis movement focused on timely recognition and phase-specific treatment of first-episode psychosis. However, early psychosis researchers suspected that pushing the point of intervention even further back to the prodromal phase of psychotic disorders may result in even better outcomes. This article reviews intervention research in the ultra-high-risk phase of psychotic disorders., Data Sources: A literature search of intervention trials with ultra-high-risk cohorts published after 1980 was conducted on PubMed with the search terms prodrome and intervention., Study Selection: All published intervention trials with ultra-high-risk cohorts., Data Synthesis: The first generation of intervention trials indicated that both pharmacologic and psychological intervention strategies may be of value in terms of symptom reduction and delay or prevention of onset of threshold psychotic disorder., Conclusions: Further controlled intervention trials with larger sample sizes are required in order to confirm and extend these findings. We argue that the clinical staging model provides a framework for the rationale and design of such studies, with simpler, safer, and more benign interventions being better candidates for first-line treatment, while more complex and potentially harmful treatments should be reserved for those cases in which response has failed to occur. Recent evidence indicates that neuroprotective agents, such as essential fatty acids, may be a suitable form of intervention for the ultra-high-risk phase of psychotic disorders, with a positive risk-benefit balance. Ethical aspects have become more salient given the recently observed declining transition rate in ultra-high-risk samples. We outline the key questions for the next generation of ultra-high-risk intervention trials., (Copyright 2009 Physicians Postgraduate Press, Inc.)

Objective: To investigate if ethyl-eicosapentaenoic acid (E-EPA) augmentation improves antipsychotic efficacy and tolerability in first-episode psychosis (FEP)., Method: We performed a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of 2-g E-EPA augmentation in 80 FEP patients. Sixty-nine patients were eligible for analysis; a post hoc analysis was computed for a subgroup of nonaffective FEP patients (N = 53). The first participant was included in November 2000 and the last participant completed the trial in August 2003. Primary outcome measures were symptom change scores and time to first response, while tolerability measures and cumulative antipsychotic dose were secondary outcome measures., Results: Analysis of covariance controlling for baseline symptoms found no significant mean difference between E-EPA and placebo at week 12 for symptom change scores. Cox regression analysis revealed a significant treatment by diagnosis interaction (p = .024) for time to first response favoring E-EPA in nonaffective psychosis. Post hoc analysis for cumulative response rates further confirmed a higher response rate at week 6 (42.9% [15/35] vs. 17.6% [6/34] for all participants, p = .036; 54.2% [13/24] vs. 17.2% [5/29] for the nonaffective psychosis subset, p = .008); however, the difference at week 12 was no longer significant. Analysis of secondary outcome measures revealed that E-EPA-augmented participants needed 20% less antipsychotic medication between weeks 4 through 6 (p = .03), had less extrapyramidal side effects in the initial 9 weeks (p < .05 for all participants and for all timepoints), and reported less constipation (p = .011) and fewer sexual side effects (p = .016) than those treated with antipsychotic medication alone., Conclusion: The findings suggest that E-EPA may accelerate treatment response and improve the tolerability of antipsychotic medications. However, it was not possible to demonstrate a sustained symptomatic benefit of E-EPA in early psychosis, possibly due to a ceiling effect, since a high proportion of first-episode patients already achieve symptomatic remission with antipsychotic medication alone. Further controlled trials in nonaffective early psychosis seem warranted., Trial Registration: Australian Clinical Trials Registry identifier 12605000267651 (http://actr.org.au).