Telehealth-Based Psychoeducation for Caregivers: The Family Intervention in Recent-Onset Schizophrenia Treatment Study

BackgroundSchizophrenia is a lifelong illness that requires long-term treatment and caregiving. Family psychoeducation (FP) has been shown to lessen caregiver burden, improve caregiver functioning, and improve outcomes in patients. However, the impact of FP delivered specifically to caregivers on patient outcomes has not been well explored, particularly for early schizophrenia. Furthermore, there is a lack of research examining the benefits of telehealth-based psychoeducation for caregivers on either patient or caregiver outcomes. ObjectiveThe Family Intervention in Recent-Onset Schizophrenia Treatment (FIRST) study is a randomized controlled trial of patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorders and their caregivers, which is designed to evaluate the effect of telehealth-based, caregiver-focused, study-provided psychoeducation versus usual care (UC) on patient treatment failure (TF). The impact of study-provided psychoeducation on caregiver burden is also investigated. MethodsEligible patients and their designated caregivers were randomly assigned to either the study-provided psychoeducation (≤16 sessions of telehealth-based psychoeducation over 6 months) or UC group, stratified by antipsychotic treatment (paliperidone palmitate or oral antipsychotic). The major TF events (ie, psychiatric hospitalization or intervention, arrest or incarceration, and suicide attempts) were assessed at 3, 6, and 12 months after baseline. A proportional means model using mean cumulative function was used to assess between-group differences in the mean cumulative number of TF events over 12 months. Caregiver burden was assessed using the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire and 12-item Short Form Health Survey. ResultsA total of 148 pairs of participants were enrolled in the study, of whom 96 (64.9%) patients and 94 (63.5%) caregivers completed the 12-month follow-up. The mean number of sessions in the study-provided psychoeducation group was 7.7 (SD 5.9). No differences were observed between the study-provided psychoeducation and UC groups in patient outcomes (rates of TF: 70% vs 67%; P=.90) or measures of caregiver burden (assessment of caregiver distress and physical and mental health). However, post hoc analyses revealed lower relapse rates in patients who received paliperidone palmitate than in those who received oral antipsychotics at all time points. Although the FIRST study did not meet the primary end point, several key lessons were identified to inform future caregiver-focused, telehealth-based FP interventions. Lack of study-provided psychoeducation, focus on caregiver-only intervention, difficulties with enrollment, and caregiver–treatment team coordination may have affected the outcomes of the FIRST study. ConclusionsKey insights from the FIRST study suggest the potential importance of supporting sufficient caregiver engagement; communication between clinicians, patients, and family members regarding treatment plans; and solidifying the relationship between clinicians providing psychoeducation to the caregiver and patient treatment team. Trial RegistrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02600741; http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT0260074

Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Rating Scale factors in treatment‐resistant depression at onset of treatment: Derivation, replication, and change over time during treatment with esketamine

Abstract Objective Derive and confirm factor structure of the Montgomery‐Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) in patients with treatment‐resistant depression (TRD) and evaluate how the factors evident at baseline change over 4 weeks of esketamine treatment. Methods Two similarly‐designed, short‐term TRANSFORM trials randomized adults to esketamine or matching placebo nasal spray, each with a newly‐initiated oral antidepressant, for 4 weeks (TRANSFORM‐1: N = 342 patients; TRANSFORM‐2: N = 223 patients). The factor structure of MADRS item scores at baseline was determined by exploratory factor analysis in TRANSFORM‐2 and corroborated by confirmatory factor analysis in TRANSFORM‐1. Change in MADRS factor scores from baseline (day 1) to the end of the 28‐day double‐blind treatment phase of TRANSFORM‐2 was analyzed using a mixed‐effects model for repeated measures (MMRM). Results Three factors were identified based on analysis of MADRS items: Factor 1 labeled affective and anhedonic symptoms (apparent sadness, reported sadness, lassitude, inability to feel), Factor 2 labeled anxiety and vegetative symptoms (inner tension, reduced sleep, reduced appetite, concentration difficulties), and Factor 3 labeled hopelessness (pessimistic thoughts, suicidal thoughts). The three‐factor structure observed in TRANSFORM‐2 was verified in TRANSFORM‐1. Treatment benefit at 24 h with esketamine versus placebo was observed on all 3 factors and continued throughout the 4‐week double‐blind treatment period. Conclusions A three‐factor structure for MADRS appears to generalize to TRD. All three factors improved over 4 weeks of treatment with esketamine nasal spray

Cardiovascular Effects of Canagliflozin in Relation to Renal Function and Albuminuria

Background: People with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk, including for hospitalization for heart failure (HHF). Canagliflozin reduced CV and kidney events in patients with T2DM and high CV risk or nephropathy in the CANVAS (CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study) Program and the CREDENCE (Canagliflozin and Renal Events in Diabetes with Established Nephropathy Clinical Evaluation) trial. Objectives: The aim of this study was to assess the effects of canagliflozin on CV outcomes according to baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urine albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) in pooled patient-level data from the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial. Methods: Canagliflozin effects on CV death or HHF were assessed by baseline eGFR (60 mL/min/1.73 m2) and UACR (300 mg/g). HRs and 95% CIs were estimated by using Cox regression models overall and according to subgroups. Results: A total of 14,543 participants from the CANVAS Program (N = 10,142) and the CREDENCE (N = 4,401) trial were included, with a mean age of 63 years, 35% female, 75% White, 13.2% with baseline eGFR 300 mg/g. Rates of CV death or HHF increased as eGFR declined and/or UACR increased. Canagliflozin significantly reduced CV death or HHF compared with placebo (19.4 vs 28.0 events per 1,000 patient-years; HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.62-0.79), with consistent results across eGFR and UACR categories (all P interaction >0.40). Conclusions: Risk of CV death or HHF was higher in those with lower baseline eGFR and/or higher UACR. Canagliflozin consistently reduced CV death or HHF in participants with T2DM and high CV risk or nephropathy regardless of baseline renal function or level of albuminuria. (Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Assessment Study [CANVAS], NCT01032629; A Study of the Effects of Canagliflozin [JNJ-24831754] on Renal Endpoints in Adult Participants With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [CANVAS-R], NCT01989754; and Evaluation of the Effects of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Participants With Diabetic Nephropathy [CREDENCE], NCT02065791