Epidemiology and Treatment Guidelines of Negative Symptoms in Schizo-phrenia in Central and Eastern Europe: A Literature Review

A Study of Neurological Soft Signs and Cognition in Schizophrenia

INTRODUCTION

Neurological soft signs (NSS) are delicate neurological abnormalities that comprise deficits in motor coordination, problems with the sequencing of complex motor acts, and sensory integration difficulties. These are nonspecific with no specific localization in the brain. NSS are found in many patients with Schizophrenia. Cognitive dysfunctions are also present in more than two-thirds of patients with Schizophrenia. This study aims at assessing the NSS and its association with cognitive impairment in patients with Schizophrenia.

METHODS

 A total of 100 Schizophrenia patients were included in the study. The Heidelberg scale was used for assessing the NSS. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment Scale (MoCA) for cognitive impairment, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) for Schizophrenia, and the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) were used to assess the severity. Statistical analysis was performed by Pearson's Chi-square test, Kruskal-Wallis test, Wilcoxon rank tests and Spearman rank correlation along with mean and standard deviation.

RESULTS

 NSS were present in 68% (N=68) of the patients with motor coordination being maximally affected. Cognitive impairment was found in 73% (N=73) of patients with a MoCA score <26. Patients with predominant negative symptoms had higher NSS scores and lower MoCA scores. A "statistically significant" correlation was observed between cognitive impairment and NSS. Most patients with NSS and impaired cognition were in the "markedly ill" category of BPRS.

CONCLUSION

 A significant association was observed between cognitive deficits, negative symptoms, and NSS in Schizophrenia. NSS and cognitive dysfunctions are integral parts of Schizophrenia symptom domains and need to be assessed as the negative symptoms and severity of illness are associated with NSS, especially problems with motor coordination and cognitive dysfunctions.

Neuro-Immune Aspects of Schizophrenia with Severe Negative Symptoms: New Diagnostic Markers of Disease Phenotype

The aim of the study was to analyze the immune-inflammatory profile of patients with paranoid schizophrenia and relate it to the severity of negative symptoms and the MRI data in order to identify biomarkers of schizophrenia severity, search for new approaches to therapy, and control its effectiveness.

Materials and Methods

The main group included 51 patients with paranoid schizophrenia, the control group - 30 healthy subjects. Patients underwent MRI scans and immunological studies, which included an assessment of natural and adaptive immunity, the systemic level of key pro-inflammatory and anti-inflammatory cytokines, and other markers of inflammation.

Results

Disorders of immunity and immunoinflammatory profile in patients with paranoid schizophrenia with severe negative symptoms were revealed for the first time: in the presence of severe negative symptoms (>15 points according to the NSA-4 scale), the levels of humoral immunity factors, cytokines IL-10 and IL-12p40 and neurotrophin NGF were increased as well as the markers of systemic inflammation. Morphometric changes in the brain, typical for patients with schizophrenia, and also specific for patients with severe negative symptoms, were determined. The data analysis revealed correlations between the immune changes with structural changes in some of the brain areas, including the frontal cortex and hippocampus. Associations were found between the levels of anti-inflammatory IL-10, IL-12p40 cytokines and morphometric parameters of the brain, specific only for schizophrenic patients with severe negative symptoms.

Conclusion

The interdisciplinary approach, combining brain morphometry with in-depth immunological and clinical studies, made it possible to determine neurobiological, immune, and neurocognitive markers of paranoid schizophrenia with severe negative symptoms. The results are important for further deciphering the pathogenesis of schizophrenia and its subtypes, as well as for the search for new approaches to the treatment of severe forms of the disease.

[History and current state of the problem of negative disorders (research of nosological period)]

Pioneers of nosology in psychiatry considered mental deficit as a basic disorder obligated to all clinical forms of illness, as did E. Kraepelin in the concept of dementia praecox and E. Bleuler in the concept of schizophrenia. At the present stage of studies, this position is clearly articulated in the «deficit schizophrenia» concept of J. Klosterkotter. Negative disorders are considered in categorical approach to interpret psychopathological dimensions of schizophrenia as coordinated, strongly bound with positive syndromes (concept of «dialectical unity» of A.V. Snezhnevskiy, 1964) and classified as syndromes according to systematics of positive disorders. However, distinguished types of negative disorders are determined in terms of positive syndromes or characterological changes (asthenic, pseudopsychopathic deficit). Within a new paradigm (dimensional approach to schizophrenia), which differs from the categorical approach, negative disorders are considered as a distinct domain, primary in relation to other psychopathological phenomena of schizophrenia). A concept of primary persistent negative symptoms serves as basis of the current concept of schizophrenic deficit. Factor analysis revealed two domains of negative disorders: 1) emotional blunting: blunted affect, alogia; 2) avolition: apathy, anhedonia, asociality.

EPA guidance on assessment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia

Background

During the last decades, a renewed interest for negative symptoms (NS) was brought about by the increased awareness that they interfere severely with real-life functioning, particularly when they are primary and persistent.

Methods

In this guidance paper, we provide a systematic review of the evidence and elaborate several recommendations for the conceptualization and assessment of NS in clinical trials and practice.

Results

Expert consensus and systematic reviews have provided guidance for the optimal assessment of primary and persistent negative symptoms; second-generation rating scales, which provide a better assessment of the experiential domains, are available; however, NS are still poorly assessed both in research and clinical settings.

This European Psychiatric Association (EPA) guidance recommends the use of persistent negative symptoms (PNS) construct in the context of clinical trials and highlights the need for further efforts to make the definition of PNS consistent across studies in order to exclude as much as possible secondary negative symptoms. We also encourage clinicians to use second-generation scales, at least to complement first-generation ones.

The EPA guidance further recommends the evidence-based exclusion of several items included in first-generation scales from any NS summary or factor score to improve NS measurement in research and clinical settings. Self-rated instruments are suggested to further complement observer-rated scales in NS assessment.

Several recommendations are provided for the identification of secondary negative symptoms in clinical settings.

Conclusions

The dissemination of this guidance paper may promote the development of national guidelines on negative symptom assessment and ultimately improve the care of people with schizophrenia.

Assessment and Treatment of Negative Symptoms in Schizophrenia-A Regional Perspective

Clinicians and researchers consider that there are a variety of symptoms that constitute negative symptoms in schizophrenia, and they may use different definitions for the same symptoms. These differences are also reflected in a variety of negative symptom rating scales. Both research and clinical work are negatively affected by the lack of consensus regarding the symptoms that constitute negative symptoms in schizophrenia. Leading research groups have investigated ways to reduce heterogeneity in the domain of negative symptoms in schizophrenia; however, little attention has been paid to regional differences in the concepts of negative symptoms in schizophrenia. The objective of this review was to collect and summarize information about the assessment and treatment of negative symptoms of schizophrenia in Central and Eastern Europe (CEE). Nineteen experts from 17 countries in CEE participated in this project. The participants collected information about their countries, including the following: (1) the most important publications about negative symptoms in schizophrenia (irrespective of the time of their publication); (2) the most frequently used negative symptom of schizophrenia in clinical practice; (3) definitions of frequently used negative symptoms; and (4) treatment of negative symptoms in schizophrenia. The participating experts/countries most frequently reported the following five negative symptoms: avolition, blunted affect, alogia, asociality, and anhedonia. Several experts also considered other symptoms as belonging to the negative symptom domain, such as a decrease in energy level and changes in personality. The importance of evaluating the long-term course and the relationship between negative symptoms and other symptom domains was also noted. No noticeable differences were reported in the treatment of negative symptoms compared to currently published guidelines and algorithms. The most frequently reported negative symptoms included those defined by the NIMH-MATRICS consensus statement on negative symptoms and recently endorsed in a guidance paper of the European Psychiatric Association. The main differences in the concepts, names, and definitions of primary negative symptoms, especially those related to personality changes, and to the evaluation of the long-term course and relationship between different symptom domains in CEE compared to the current English language literature deserve the attention of psychiatrists and other professionals in this field.

Psychological intervention, antipsychotic medication or a combined treatment for adolescents with a first episode of psychosis: the MAPS feasibility three-arm RCT

BACKGROUND

When psychosis emerges in young people there is a risk of poorer outcomes, and access to evidence-based treatments is paramount. The current evidence base is limited. Antipsychotic medications show only a small benefit over placebo, but young people experience more side effects than adults. There is sparse evidence for psychological intervention. Research is needed to determine the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of psychological intervention versus antipsychotic medication versus a combined treatment for adolescents with psychosis.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of Managing Adolescent first-episode Psychosis: a feasibility Study (MAPS) was to determine the feasibility of conducting a definitive trial to answer the question of clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of these three treatment options.

DESIGN

This was a prospective, randomised, open-blinded, evaluation feasibility trial with a single blind. Participants were allocated 1 : 1 : 1 to receive antipsychotic medication, psychological intervention or a combination of both. A thematic qualitative study explored the acceptability and feasibility of the trial.

SETTING

Early intervention in psychosis services and child and adolescent mental health services in Manchester, Oxford, Lancashire, Sussex, Birmingham, Norfolk and Suffolk, and Northumberland, Tyne and Wear.

PARTICIPANTS

People aged 14-18 years experiencing a first episode of psychosis either with an International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, schizophrenia spectrum diagnosis or meeting the entry criteria for early intervention in psychosis who had not received antipsychotic medication or psychological intervention within the last 3 months.

INTERVENTIONS

Psychological intervention involved up to 26 hours of cognitive-behavioural therapy and six family intervention sessions over 6 months, with up to four booster sessions. Antipsychotic medication was prescribed by the participant's psychiatrist in line with usual practice. Combined treatment was a combination of psychological intervention and antipsychotic medication.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was feasibility (recruitment, treatment adherence and retention). We used a three-stage progression criterion to determine feasibility. Secondary outcomes were psychosis symptoms, recovery, anxiety and depression, social and educational/occupational functioning, drug and alcohol use, health economics, adverse/metabolic side effects and adverse/serious adverse events.

RESULTS

We recruited 61 out of 90 (67.8%; amber zone) potential participants (psychological intervention, n = 18; antipsychotic medication, n = 22; combined treatment, n = 21). Retention to follow-up was 51 out of 61 participants (83.6%; green zone). In the psychological intervention arm and the combined treatment arm, 32 out of 39 (82.1%) participants received six or more sessions of cognitive-behavioural therapy (green zone). In the combined treatment arm and the antipsychotic medication arm, 28 out of 43 (65.1%) participants received antipsychotic medication for 6 consecutive weeks (amber zone). There were no serious adverse events related to the trial and one related adverse event. Overall, the number of completed secondary outcome measures, including health economics, was small.

LIMITATIONS

Medication adherence was determined by clinician report, which can be biased. The response to secondary outcomes was low, including health economics. The small sample size obtained means that the study lacked statistical power and there will be considerable uncertainty regarding estimates of treatment effects.

CONCLUSIONS

It is feasible to conduct a trial comparing psychological intervention with antipsychotic medication and a combination treatment in young people with psychosis with some adaptations to the design, including adaptations to collection of health economic data to determine cost-effectiveness.

FUTURE WORK

An adequately powered definitive trial is required to provide robust evidence.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN80567433.

FUNDING

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 4. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Inflammation and Negative Symptoms of Schizophrenia: Implications for Reward Processing and Motivational Deficits

Negative symptoms of schizophrenia are debilitating and chronic in nature, are difficult to treat, and contribute to poor functional outcomes. Motivational deficits are a core negative symptom and may involve alterations in reward processing, which involve subcortical regions such as the basal ganglia. More specifically, dopamine-rich regions like the ventral striatum, have been implicated in these reward-processing deficits. Inflammation is one mechanism that may underlie negative symptoms, and specifically motivational deficits, via the effects of inflammatory cytokines on the basal ganglia. Previous work has demonstrated that inflammatory stimuli decrease neural activity in the ventral striatum and decrease connectivity in reward-relevant neural circuitry. The immune system has been shown to be involved in the pathophysiology of schizophrenia, and inflammatory cytokines have been shown to be altered in patients with the disorder. This paper reviews the literature on associations between inflammatory markers and negative symptoms of schizophrenia as well as the role of anti-inflammatory drugs to target negative symptoms. We also review the literature on the role of inflammation and reward processing deficits in both healthy controls and individuals with depression. We use the literature on inflammation and depression as a basis for a model that explores potential mechanisms responsible for inflammation modulating certain aspects of negative symptoms in patients with schizophrenia. This approach may offer novel targets to treat these symptoms of the disorder that are significant barriers to functional recovery and do not respond well to available antipsychotic medications.

Trends in the prescribing of antipsychotic medicines in Pakistan: implications for the future

Introduction and objectives: There is a paucity of antipsychotic prescribing and utilization data in Pakistan that needs addressing, especially with issues of availability, affordability, gender differences, and domestic violence, to develop pertinent strategies. The objective of this study was to address these issues by describing current antipsychotic utilization patterns in Pakistan among adult patients attending tertiary care hospitals and private practitioners.Methods: A three staged approach was used including (1) assessment of total antipsychotic utilization, expenditure, and costs per unit between 2010 and 2015, (2) an in-depth retrospective study of prescribing patterns, including co-morbidities among representative hospital patients in Pakistan, and (3) assessment of the quality of prescribing against WHO targets.Results: Total use of antipsychotics increased 4.3-fold and the cost/unit increased by 13.2% during the study period. Risperidone and olanzapine were the most prescribed antipsychotics with more limited use of other typical and atypical antipsychotics. The number of medicines per encounter was 4.56. Prescription using generic instead of brand names was 21.4%. Seven per cent were prescribed more than one antipsychotic concurrently.Conclusion: There has been an appreciable increase in antipsychotic utilization in recent years in Pakistan, especially atypical antipsychotics, with little polypharmacy. Ongoing utilization of typical antipsychotics may be due to comorbidities such as diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Issues of international non-proprietary name prescribing need investigating along with the high number of medicines per encounter and gender inequality.

[Personality disorders and schizophrenic defect (problem of comorbidity)]

AIM

To test the main hypothesis that the deficit phenomena in schizophrenia act not in the 'pure' form, but in the form of aggravating personality characteristics, forming so-called 'common' syndromes with personality disorders (PD).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The results of the psychopathological study (with the use of psychometric methods) of deficit disorders in a sample of 170 patients with schizophrenia and schizophrenia spectrum disorders (63 men, 107 women) are presented in relation to the abnormal structure of premorbid personality (PD of clusters A, B, C). An analysis of negative symptoms according to the comparability of defect to the profile of premorbid personality made it possible to distinguish three groups of deficit states associated with PD - 'common syndromes': defensive schizoidy by the type of deficit schizoid and expansive schizoidy by the type of 'verschroben' (cluster A); pathological hysterical infantilism, malignant hysteria and defective erotomania (cluster B); pseudo-psychasthenia and pathological rationalism (cluster C).

RESULTS

It has been found that the symptomatology of 'common syndromes' is subject to patterns reflecting the dichotomy of the basic defect. This pattern is valid not only for one single cluster of PD, but extends to all psychopathy-like disorders, regardless of their affiliation with a particular cluster. The pathocharacterological component of the 'common syndromes' coexisting with the deficit symptom complexes is subject to the basic deficit component of the defect and is separated into polar dimensions (defensive-expansive) within specific clusters of PD, and then unified in accordance with the dichotomy of schizophrenic defect in categories with the predominance of emotional or apathoabulic disorders.

CONCLUSION

Psychopathy-like symptom complexes in the space of 'common syndromes' can be qualified as a psychopathological construct secondary to basic deficit disorders, and their isolation as an independent entity of negative disorders appears to be unjustified.

Hepatic Safety of Atypical Antipsychotics: Current Evidence and Future Directions

The newer atypical antipsychotic agents (AAPs) represent an attractive therapeutic option for a wide range of psychotic disorders, including schizophrenia and bipolar mania, because of the reduced risk of disabling extrapyramidal symptoms. However, their growing use has raised questions about their tolerability over the endocrine, metabolic, and cardiovascular axes. Indeed, atypical antipsychotic drugs are associated, to differing extents, with mild elevation of aminotransferases related to weight gain, AAP-induced metabolic syndrome, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Although the hepatic safety of new AAPs seems improved over that of chlorpromazine, they can occasionally cause idiosyncratic liver injury with varying phenotypes and, rarely, lead to acute liver failure. However, AAPs are a group of heterogeneous, chemically unrelated compounds with distinct pharmacological and pharmacokinetic properties and substantially different safety profiles, which precludes the notion of a class effect for hepatotoxicity risk and highlights the need for an individualized therapeutic approach. We discuss the current evidence on the hepatotoxicity potential of AAPs, the emerging underlying mechanisms, and the limitations inherent to this group of drugs for both establishing a proper causality assessment and developing strategies for risk management.