Associations between the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 trait facets and aggression among outpatients with personality disorder: A multimethod study

Background Most research on the Personality Inventory for DSM-5 (PID-5) was conducted with self-reports. One of the specific areas for which a multimethod design has yet to be implemented is for the PID-5's associations with aggression. The main objectives of this study were to (a) compare the PID-5 associations with self-reported and file-rated aggression, (b) compare these associations between women and men, and (c) identify the relative importance of PID-5 facet predictors. Methods A sample of outpatients with personality disorder (N = 285) was recruited in a specialized public clinic to complete questionnaires, and a subsample was assessed for file-rated aggression (n = 227). Multiple regression analyses were performed with PID-5 facets as statistical predictors but using distinct operationalizations of aggression (self-reported vs. file-rated). Moderation analyses were performed to identify the moderating effect of biological sex. Dominance analyses were computed to identify the relative importance of predictors. Results PID-5 facet predictors of self-reported and file-rated aggression were very consistent in both conditions. However, the amount of explained variance was reduced in the latter case (from 39% to 14%), especially for women (from 40% to 2%). The most important predictors were Hostility, Risk Taking, and Callousness. Conclusion Pertaining to the statistically significant facets associated with aggression, strong evidence of multimethod replication was found. The women-men discrepancies were not most obvious in their specific associations with aggression, but rather in their amount of explained variance, maybe reflecting examiners' or patients' implicit biases, and/or different manifestations of aggression between women and men

Latent profiles of patients with borderline pathology based on the alternative DSM-5 model for personality disorders

Background: There have been multiple attempts to try to parse out heterogeneity within borderline pathology by identifying patient subtypes; thus far, these works have yielded few consistent results. Recent developments in the operationalization of borderline pathology may provide new opportunities to identify clinically and conceptually meaningful subgroups of patients. The Alternative DSM-5 Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD) offers a categorical-dimensional operationalization of Borderline personality disorder (BPD) that has yet to be tested for identification of patient subgroups. The purpose of the present study is to test whether the combination of the Criterion A elements (pertaining to level of severity) and the seven pathological facets from Criterion B that define BPD in the AMPD can yield meaningful patient profiles. Methods: A total of 211 outpatients from a specialized PD treatment program (133 women, Mage = 33.66, SD = 10.97) were selected based on the presence of at least moderate borderline pathology according to cutoffs recently proposed for the Borderline Symptom List-23. Valid Criterion A (Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale) and B (Personality Inventory for DSM-5 Faceted Brief Form) self-reports were administered to measure elements and facets that define BPD in the AMPD model; these variables were used as indicators in a latent profile analysis (LPA). Results: The optimal solution generated by LPA yielded four distinct profiles: (a) Borderline traits; (b) Moderate pathology with Impulsivity; (c) Moderate pathology with Identity problems and Depressivity; and (d) Severe pathology. Clinically meaningful distinctions emerged among profiles on AMPD indicators and external variables relevant to PD, especially aggression and impulsivity. Conclusions: Profiles reflected both the “severity” and “style” components imbedded within Criterion A and B of the AMPD, as they were mainly distinguished by a continuum of severity but also by some meaningful qualitative differences that may have important clinical implications for treatment planning and contracting. Results also suggest that the four Criterion A elements have independent value to identify important differences in patients with borderline pathology. They also highlight that some Criterion B facets that define BPD in the AMPD may be especially important to identify subgroups of patients, mainly Impulsivity and Depressivity

Analysis of the interaction between personality dysfunction and traits in the statistical prediction of physical aggression: results from outpatient and community samples

Abstract : The Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), included in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) and the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (11th ed.; ICD-11) are, respectively, hybrid categorical-dimensional and dimensional frameworks for personality disorders (PDs). Both models emphasize personality dysfunction and personality traits. Previous studies investigating the links between the AMPD and ICD-11, and self-reported physical aggression have mostly focused on traits and did not take into account the potential interaction between personality dysfunction and traits. Thus, the aim of this study is to identify dysfunction*trait interactions using regression-based analysis. Outpatients with personality disorder from a specialized public clinic (N = 285) and community participants (N = 995) were recruited to complete self-report questionnaires. Some small-size, albeit significant and clinically/conceptually meaningful personality dysfunction*trait interactions were found to predict physical aggression in both samples. Interaction analyses might further inform, to some degree, about the current discussion pertaining to the potential redundancy between dysfunction and traits, the optimal personality dysfunction structure (in the case of the AMPD), as well as clinical assessment based on AMPD/ICD-11 PD frameworks

A Proposed Classification of ICD-11 Severity Degrees of Personality Pathology Using the Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale

Background: The 11th version of the World Health Organization's International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) has adopted a dimensional approach to personality disorder (PD) nosology. Notably, it includes an assessment of PD degree of severity, which can be classified according to five categories. To date, there is no gold standard measure for assessing degree of PD severity based on the ICD-11 model, and there are no empirically-based anchor points to delineate the proposed categories. With the operationalization of PD degrees of severity in the ICD-11 PD model now being closely aligned with Criterion A of the DSM-5 Alternative Model for Personality Disorders (AMPD), sharing a focus on self and interpersonal dysfunction, self-report instruments developed for the latter model might prove useful as screening tools to determine degrees of severity in the former.Methods: The Self and Interpersonal Functioning Scale, a brief validated self-report questionnaire originally designed to assess level of personality pathology according to the AMPD framework, was used to derive anchor points to delineate the five severity degrees from the ICD-11 PD model. Data from five clinical and non-clinical samples (total N = 2,240) allowed identifying anchor points for classification, based on Receiver Operating Characteristic curve analysis, Latent Class Analysis, and data distribution statistics. Categories were validated using multiple indices pertaining to externalizing and internalizing symptoms relevant to PD.Results: Analyses yielded the following anchor points for PD degrees of severity: No PD = 0–1.04; Personality Difficulty = 1.05–1.29; Mild PD = 1.30–1.89; Moderate PD = 1.90–2.49; and Severe PD = 2.50 and above. A clear gradient of severity across the five categories was observed in all samples. A high number of significant contrasts among PD categories were also observed on external variables, consistent with the ICD-11 PD degree of severity operationalization.Conclusions: The present study provides potentially useful guidelines to determine severity of personality pathology based on the ICD-11 model. The use of a brief self-report questionnaire as a screening tool for assessing PD degrees of severity should be seen as a time-efficient support for clinical decision and treatment planning

Balancing the immune response in the brain: IL-10 and its regulation

Background: The inflammatory response is critical to fight insults, such as pathogen invasion or tissue damage, but if not resolved often becomes detrimental to the host. A growing body of evidence places non-resolved inflammation at the core of various pathologies, from cancer to neurodegenerative diseases. It is therefore not surprising that the immune system has evolved several regulatory mechanisms to achieve maximum protection in the absence of pathology. Main body: The production of the anti-inflammatory cytokine interleukin (IL)-10 is one of the most important mechanisms evolved by many immune cells to counteract damage driven by excessive inflammation. Innate immune cells of the central nervous system, notably microglia, are no exception and produce IL-10 downstream of pattern recognition receptors activation. However, whereas the molecular mechanisms regulating IL-10 expression by innate and acquired immune cells of the periphery have been extensively addressed, our knowledge on the modulation of IL-10 expression by central nervous cells is much scattered. This review addresses the current understanding on the molecular mechanisms regulating IL-10 expression by innate immune cells of the brain and the implications of IL-10 modulation in neurodegenerative disorders. Conclusion: The regulation of IL-10 production by central nervous cells remains a challenging field. Answering the many remaining outstanding questions will contribute to the design of targeted approaches aiming at controlling deleterious inflammation in the brain.We acknowledge the Portuguese Foundation for Science and Technology (FCT) for providing a PhD grant to DLS (SFRH/BD/88081/2012) and a post-doctoral fellowship to SR (SFRH/BPD/72710/2010). DS, AGC and SR were funded by FEDER through the Competitiveness Factors Operational Programme (COMPETE) and National Funds through FCT under the scope of the project POCI-01-0145-FEDER007038; and by the project NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000013, supported by Norte Portugal Regional Operational Programme (NORTE 2020), under the PORTUGAL 2020 Partnership Agreement, through the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF). The MS lab was financed by Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional (FEDER) funds through the COMPETE 2020—Operacional Programme for Competitiveness and Internationalisation (POCI), Portugal 2020, and by Portuguese funds through FCT in the framework of the project “Institute for Research and Innovation in Health Sciences ” (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007274). MS is a FCT Associate Investigator. The funding body had no role in the design of the study and collection, analysis, and interpretation of the data and in writing the manuscript

Toxin-Based Models to Investigate Demyelination and Remyelination.

Clinical myelin diseases, and our best experimental approximations, are complex entities in which demyelination and remyelination proceed unpredictably and concurrently. These features can make it difficult to identify mechanistic details. Toxin-based models offer lesions with predictable spatiotemporal patterns and relatively discrete phases of damage and repair: a simpler system to study the relevant biology and how this can be manipulated. Here, we discuss the most widely used toxin-based models, with a focus on lysolecithin, ethidium bromide, and cuprizone. This includes an overview of their respective mechanisms, strengths, and limitations and step-by-step protocols for their use

Microbiome to Brain:Unravelling the Multidirectional Axes of Communication

The gut microbiome plays a crucial role in host physiology. Disruption of its community structure and function can have wide-ranging effects making it critical to understand exactly how the interactive dialogue between the host and its microbiota is regulated to maintain homeostasis. An array of multidirectional signalling molecules is clearly involved in the host-microbiome communication. This interactive signalling not only impacts the gastrointestinal tract, where the majority of microbiota resides, but also extends to affect other host systems including the brain and liver as well as the microbiome itself. Understanding the mechanistic principles of this inter-kingdom signalling is fundamental to unravelling how our supraorganism function to maintain wellbeing, subsequently opening up new avenues for microbiome manipulation to favour desirable mental health outcome