The reliability and clinical utility of ICD-11 schizoaffective disorder: A field trial

Dysregulation of MicroRNAs Derived from Plasma Extracellular Vesicles in Schizoaffective Disorder

The association between peripheral blood extracellular vesicles (EVs)-derived miRNAs (EVs-miRNAs) and neuropsychiatric diseases has been extensively studied. However, it remains largely unclear about the expression profile of EVs-miRNAs in schizoaffective disorder (SAD) patients. In our study, we isolated the EVs from plasma samples of patients and healthy controls, and then analyzed the expression profiles of EVs-miRNAs through small RNA sequencing. Our results identified 32 differentially expressed (DE) miRNAs (25 upregulated and 7 downregulated) in SAD patients. A module containing 42 miRNAs closely related to SAD was identified by weighted gene co-expression network analysis (WGCNA), among which has-miR-15b-5p, has-miR-301a-3p, has-miR-342-3p, has-miR-219b-5p, and has-miR-145-5p were identified as hub miRNAs. The enrichment analysis showed that the target genes of these 42 miRNAs were significantly enriched in multiple pathways related to neuropathology and located at synapses. A total of 6 DE miRNAs (has-miR-7-5p, has-miR-144-3p, has-miR-155-5p, has-miR-342-3p, has-miR-342-5p, and has-miR-487b-3p) associated with SAD were selected for qRT-PCR verification. The level of has-miR-342-3p in SAD patients was downregulated, and hsa-miR-155-5p was upregulated. Our findings support the hypothesis that dysregulation of EVs-miRNAs in plasma might be involved in the underlying neuropathology of SAD through several biological pathways and provide important preliminary evidence supporting the use of EVs-miRNAs as potential novel biomarkers in SAD.

The Course Patterns and Diagnostic Shifts of Patients With Schizoaffective Disorder: A Retrospective Cohort Study

ABSTRACT

Since its introduction, schizoaffective disorder (SAD) has been one of the most controversial diagnoses in psychiatry, both clinically and nosologically. In the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5), SAD diagnostic criteria were changed, and instead of a cross-sectional diagnosis, a longitudinal approach covering the life course of the illness was adopted. In this study, the meaning of this conceptual shift in the diagnosis of SAD in clinical practice is investigated throughout the course of the illness for patients with SAD. Sixty-two inpatients diagnosed with SAD according to DSM-5 diagnostic criteria are included in this study. The course of the illness from its onset to the present is investigated retrospectively. The disease duration is 18.3 ± 9.1 years. The most common diagnoses in the first hospitalization are bipolar disorder (manic episodes) and psychotic disorder, not otherwise specified. Furthermore, the time that elapsed between the first psychiatric application of the patients and the diagnosis of SAD is 9.5 ± 7.3 years. Further, when the course of the illness is grouped according to the predominance of affective and psychotic disorders, recurrent affective disorders are observed most frequently (29.3%), followed by mixed-episode disorders and a shift from affective disorders to psychotic disorders (22.4%). It is found that SAD has a heterogeneous course, and affective disorder diagnoses are more dominant during the course of the illness. The clinical relevance of the longitudinal emphasis on the total duration of the illness in the DSM-5 is also demonstrated. The affective and psychotic dichotomy, based on Kraepelin, has failed to elucidate the course of the disease in clinical practice. Therefore, clinicians should meticulously evaluate the entire course of the illness for SAD and avoid conclusive judgments over a single episode.

Complex PTSD: what is the clinical utility of the diagnosis?

Background

The diagnosis of complex posttraumatic stress disorder (CPTSD) was included in the 11th revised edition of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11). CPTSD shares trauma-specific symptoms with its sibling disorder PTSD but is additionally characterized by disturbances of the individual's self-organization (DSO). The clinical utility of the CPTSD diagnosis has yet to be thoroughly investigated.

Objective

The current study aimed to examine the clinical utility of the CPTSD diagnosis, considering the upcoming implementation of ICD-11 in clinical practice.

Method

International field studies, construct- and validity analyses leading up to the inclusion in ICD-11 are reviewed, and the diagnostic measures; International Trauma Questionnaire (ITQ) and International Trauma Interview (ITI) are presented. Also, the relationship between CPTSD and borderline personality disorder (BPD) is elaborated in an independent analysis, to clarify their differences in clinical relevance to treatment. Treatment implications for CPTSD are discussed with reference to existing guidelines and clinical needs.

Results

The validation of ITQ and ITI contributes to the cementation of CPTSD in further clinical practice, providing qualified assessment of the construct, with intended informative value for both clinical communication and facilitation of treatment. CPTSD is found distinguishable from both PTSD and BPD in empirical studies, while the possibility of comorbid BPD/PTSD cases being better described as CPTSD is acknowledged. Practitioners need to employ well-established methods developed for PTSD, while considering additional DSO-symptoms in treatment of CPTSD.

Conclusions

The inclusion of CPTSD in ICD-11 may potentially facilitate access to more tailored treatment interventions, as well as contribute to increased research focus on disorders specifically associated with stress. The clinical utility value of this additional diagnosis is expected to reveal itself further after ICD-11 is implemented in clinical practice in 2022 and onwards. Yet, CPTSD's diagnostic inclusion gives future optimism to assessing and treating complex posttraumatic stress symptoms.

Changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 and future directions in psychiatric classification

This article provides a brief overview of the changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 regarding the classification of mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders. These changes include a new chapter structure, new diagnostic categories, changes in diagnostic criteria, and steps towards dimensionality. Additionally, we review evaluative field studies of ICD-11, which provide preliminary evidence for higher reliability and clinical utility of ICD-11 compared with ICD-10. Despite the extensive revision process, changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 were relatively modest in that both systems are categorical, classifying mental phenomena based on self-reported or clinically observable symptoms. Other recent approaches to psychiatric nosology and classification (eg, neurobiology-based or hierarchical) are discussed. To meet the needs of different user groups, we propose expanding the stepwise approach to diagnosis introduced for some diagnostic categories in ICD-11, which includes categorical and dimensional elements.


Schizophrenia-schizoaffective-bipolar spectra: an epistemological perspective

For decades clinicians and researchers have been thinking and writing about the spectrum of schizophrenia disorders. Indeed both Kraepelin and Bleuler believed in schizophrenia as a spectrum, both in a clinical (individual) and hereditary (family) continuum, from just some exquisite personality traits to unquestionable chronic and debilitating psychosis. Other authors would put the schizophrenia spectrum disorders on different levels of continuum: developmental, psychofunctional, existential, and genetic. Here, we would like to present an historical chronology for the schizophrenia-schizoaffective-bipolar spectra plus a tridimensional model for these spectra: the first axis for categories (affective versus nonaffective psychoses), the second axis for dimensions (personality versus full blown psychosis), and a third axis for biomarkers (remission versus relapse). We believe that without the schizophrenia-schizoaffective-bipolar spectra concept in our minds all our efforts will keep failing one the hardest quest: searching for biomarkers in schizophrenia and related disorders.

Engagement of Russian Mental Health Professionals in the Development of WHO's ICD-11

The World Health Organization (WHO) has officially approved the next version of its global diagnostic system, the International Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems, Eleventh Revision (ICD-11). Processes to implement the ICD-11 are now underway. Developing the ICD-11 chapter on Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders, in line with WHO's core priorities to enhance the clinical utility, reliability, and global applicability of the guidelines, necessitated a large-scale scientifically-rigorous research program. Such a program of global field studies engaged mental health professionals from across the world, with substantial contributions from clinicians in the Russian Federation. This paper systematically highlights the substantive roles played by Russian clinicians in all steps of development of the mental, behavioural, and neurodevelopmental disorder guidelines, including their participation in the following: 1) early formative field studies that informed the organizing principles and overarching structure of the ICD-11; 2) large-scale online studies that used a case-controlled methodology to evaluate the guideline's clinical utility and the accuracy with which the new ICD-11 guidelines could be applied by global clinicians; 3) an online network of mental health professionals who provided direct feedback on the ICD-11 to WHO (also known as the Global Clinical Practice Network, www.globalclinicalpractice.net) with over 16,000 members from 160 countries, and with the Russian Federation being in the top five most represented countries in the network; 4) clinic-based field studies that tested the reliability and clinical utility of the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines; and 5) development and participation in training programs that prepare clinicians in implementing the diagnostic guidelines in clinical settings. In these many ways, Russian clinicians have substantively and directly contributed to efforts to maximize the clinical usefulness, consistency, acceptability, and applicability of the ICD-11's mental, behavioural, and neurodevelopmental disorder guidelines. This substantial engagement of clinicians will conceivably facilitate the adoption and use of the guidelines by clinicians in the Russian Federation and other Russian-speaking countries, as the ICD-11 is implemented over the coming years.

Long-Term Real-World Effectiveness of Pharmacotherapies for Schizoaffective Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the long-term real-world effectiveness of antipsychotics and other psychopharmacotherapies in the treatment of schizoaffective disorder (SCHAFF).

METHOD

Two nationwide cohorts of SCHAFF patients were identified from Finnish and Swedish registers. Within-individual design was used with stratified Cox regression. The main exposure was use of antipsychotics. Adjunctive pharmacotherapies included mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and benzodiazepines and benzodiazepine-related drugs. The main outcome was hospitalization due to psychosis.

RESULTS

The Finnish cohort included 7655 and the Swedish cohort 7525 patients. Median follow-up time was 11.2 years (IQR 5.6-11.5) in the Finnish and 7.6 years (IQR 3.8-10.3) in the Swedish cohort. Clozapine and long-acting injectable (LAI) antipsychotics were consistently associated with a decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization and treatment failure (psychiatric hospitalization, any change in medication, death) in both cohorts. Quetiapine was not associated with a decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization. Mood stabilizers used in combination with antipsychotics were associated with a decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization (Finnish cohort HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.71-0.81; Swedish cohort HR 0.84, 0.78-0.90) when compared with antipsychotic monotherapy. Combination of antidepressants and antipsychotics was associated with a decreased risk of psychosis hospitalization in the Swedish cohort (HR 0.90, 0.83-0.97) but not in the Finnish cohort (1.00, 0.94-1.07), and benzodiazepine use was associated with an increased risk (Finnish cohort HR 1.07, 1.01-1.14; Swedish cohort 1.21, 1.13-1.30).

CONCLUSIONS

Clozapine, LAIs, and combination therapy with mood stabilizers were associated with the best outcome and use of quetiapine and benzodiazepines with the worst outcome in the treatment of SCHAFF.

[Psychotic disorders in ICD-11: the revisions]

Psychotic disorders in ICD-11: the revisions Abstract. This article provides an overview of the main changes to the chapter "Schizophrenia or Other Primary Psychotic Disorders" (6A2) from ICD-10 to ICD-11 and compares them with the psychosis chapter of DSM-5. These changes include abandoning the classical subtypes of Schizophrenia as well as of the special significance of Schneider's first-rank symptoms, resulting in the general requirement of two key features (one must be a positive symptom) in the definition of "Schizophrenia" (6A20) and the allowance for bizarre contents in "Delusional Disorder" (6A24), which now includes "Induced Delusional Disorder" (F24). Further introduced are the focus on the current episode, the restriction of "Acute and Transient Psychotic Disorder" (6A23) to the former Polymorphic Disorder Without Schizophrenic Symptoms (F23.0), the diagnosis of delusional "Obsessive-Compulsive or Related Disorders" (6B2) exclusively as Obsessive-Compulsive Disorders, the specification of "Schizoaffective Disorder" (6A21), and the formulation of a distinct subchapter "Catatonia" (6A4) for the assessment of catatonic features in the context of several disorders. In analogy to DSM-5, ICD-11 now includes the optional category "Symptomatic Manifestations of Primary Psychotic Disorders" (6A25) for the dimensional quantification of symptoms. Again, developmental aspects remain unattended in in the ICD-11-definitions of psychotic disorders.

Accuracy of diagnostic classification and clinical utility assessment of ICD-11 compared to ICD-10 in 10 mental disorders: findings from a web-based field study

In this web-based field study, we compared the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility of 10 selected mental disorders between the ICD-11 Clinical Descriptions and Diagnostic Guidelines (CDDG) and the ICD-10 CDDG using vignettes in a sample of 928 health professionals from all WHO regions. On average, the ICD-11 CDDG displayed significantly higher diagnostic accuracy (71.9% for ICD-11, 53.2% for ICD-10), higher ease of use, better goodness of fit, higher clarity, and lower time required for diagnosis compared to the ICD-10 CDDG. The advantages of the ICD-11 CDDG were largely limited to new diagnoses in ICD-11. After limiting analyses to diagnoses existing in ICD-11 and ICD-10, the ICD-11 CDDG were only superior in ease of use. The ICD-11 CDDG were not inferior in diagnostic accuracy or clinical utility compared to the ICD-10 CDDG for any of the vignettes. Diagnostic accuracy was consistent across WHO regions and independent of participants' clinical experience. There were no differences between medical doctors and psychologists in diagnostic accuracy, but members of other health professions had greater difficulties in determining correct diagnoses based on the ICD-11 CDDG. In sum, there were no differences in diagnostic accuracy for diagnoses existing in ICD-10 and ICD-11, but the introduction of new diagnoses in ICD-11 has improved the diagnostic classification of some clinical presentations. The favourable clinical utility ratings of the ICD-11 CDDG give reason to expect a positive evaluation by health professionals in the implementation phase of ICD-11. Yet, training in ICD-11 is needed to further enhance the diagnostic accuracy.

Anxiety and Fear-Related Disorders in the ICD-11: Results from a Global Case-controlled Field Study

BACKGROUND

This article reports the results of one of a series of global field studies implemented by the World Health Organization (WHO) to evaluate the accuracy, clinical utility, and global applicability of the new diagnostic guidelines for Mental, Behavioural and Neurological Disorders included in the next version of WHO's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11).

AIMS OF THE STUDY

The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility ratings of global clinicians implementing the ICD-11 diagnostic guidelines for Anxiety and Fear-Related Disorders, relative to those applying ICD-10 guidelines. The study also aimed to identify elements of the guidelines that required further refinement or clarification.

METHODS

1840 global mental health professionals registered with WHO's Global Clinical Practice Network completed the study in one of six study languages. Participants were randomly assigned to apply either the ICD-11 or ICD-10 guidelines to diagnose standardized case vignettes, and to rate the clinical utility of their assigned guidelines.

RESULTS

ICD-11's diagnostic accuracy and clinical utility were equivalent or superior to that of ICD-10. Global clinicians were significantly more accurate in diagnosing Generalized Anxiety Disorder, Specific Phobia and adult cases of Separation Anxiety Disorder when using ICD-11 and provided high clinical utility ratings for these disorders. Clinicians also found the ICD-11 guidelines easy to use, clear, and a good fit to patients they see in their clinical practice. However, clinicians had difficulty with distinguishing the boundary between disorder and normality for subthreshold cases of anxiety, and also with applying the new ICD-11 guidelines on panic attacks.

CONCLUSIONS

The new diagnostic guidelines for Anxiety Disorders in ICD-11 can be applied in an acceptably consistent manner by global clinicians and perform as well or better than the previous guidelines for ICD-10. Study findings also helped identify aspects of the ICD-11 guidelines that required refinement prior to their publication and areas that should be emphasized in training programs.

The Italian ICD-11 field trial: clinical utility of diagnostic guidelines for schizophrenia and related disorders

Background

The 11th revision of the International Classification of Diseases and Related Disorders (ICD-11) has been released. In order to test the clinical consistency and the clinical utility of the proposed guidelines the World Health Organization (WHO) has carried out the Ecological Implementation Field Studies in various countries. In this paper the results of the Italian field trials on the clinical utility of the ICD-11 diagnostic guideline concerning schizophrenia and related disorders will be presented.

Methods

In Italy, field trials have been carried out at the Department of Psychiatry of the University of Campania “L. Vanvitelli”. All patients showing any psychotic symptom and referring to the outpatient and inpatient units have been recruited. Patients were interviewed by two clinicians with whom they had not had any prior clinical contact. At the end of each interview, clinicians were asked to complete 12 questions about the clinical utility of the diagnostic guidelines as applied to each patient.

Results

Fourteen clinicians and 100 patients have been involved. The ICD-11 clinical guidelines were perceived as easy to use, with an adequate goodness of fit, clear and understandable and with an adequate level of details and specificity to describe the essential features of the diagnoses. Clinicians rated very positively their usefulness in describing the threshold between patient’s disorder and normality. Despite still very positive, the guidelines have been perceived as less useful to select a treatment, to assess patients’ prognosis and to communicate with other mental health professionals.

Conclusions

The 11th revision of the chapter on Mental, Behavioural and Neurodevelopmental Disorders has made substantive changes to the conceptualization of mental disorders which could have impacted on their reliability and clinical utility. Results of the Italian field studies, in line with those reported by the international sample, highlight that ICD-11 has been rated as highly clinically useful by participating clinician, more than the ICD-10. This could be considered a good reason to be optimistic about the implementation of the ICD-11 among global clinicians.

Trial registration The study has been approved by the Ethical Review Board of the University of Campania “L. Vanvitelli” (N. 416, 2016)

Pathways linking clinician demographics to mental health diagnostic accuracy: An international perspective

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the impact of clinicians' demographics and response time on diagnostic accuracy.

METHOD

We conducted mediation analyses on data from a WHO field study of the ICD-11 that required clinicians (N = 1,822, 44.3% female, 44.92 years old) to diagnose two case vignettes.

RESULTS

Contradictory to decision-making theories, clinicians with more years of experience and slower response times had higher rates of diagnostic accuracy. In comparison to North American clinicians, clinicians in Asia who responded faster had lower accuracy rates, and clinicians in South America who responded slower had higher accuracy rates. Medical professionals with quicker response times had lower accuracy rates compared with psychologists and other clinical professionals.

CONCLUSION

Findings indicate that clinicians should consider how their clinical setting, level of experience, and response time influence the diagnostic process. Future research on diagnostic accuracy should consider additional mediating factors, such as cultural differences in response time.