Should we be concerned about stigma and discrimination in people at risk for psychosis? A systematic review.

AbstractBackgroundPrevious studies have provided initial evidence that people at risk for psychosis (PR) suffer from stigma and discrimination related to their condition. However, no study has systematically reviewed stigma and discrimination associated with being at PR and the potential underlying mechanisms.MethodsThis work aimed to systematically review all studies addressing stigma and discrimination in PR people in order to assess: (1) the occurrence of this phenomenon and its different components (public, internalized, perceived, and labeling-related), (2) whether stigma affects outcomes of the PR state, and (3) whether other factors modulate stigma among PR individuals.ResultsThe reviewed studies (n = 38) widely differ in their design, methodological quality, and populations under investigation, thus limiting direct comparison of findings. However, converging evidence suggests that the general public endorses stigmatizing attitudes towards PR individuals, and that this is more frequent in people with a low educational level or with no direct experience of the PR state. PR individuals experience more internalized stigma and perceive more discrimination than healthy subjects or patients with non-psychotic disorders. Further, PR labeling is equally associated with both positive (e.g. validation and relief) and negative effects (e.g. status loss and discrimination). Moreover, stigma increases the likelihood of poor outcome, transition to full-psychosis, disengagement from services, and family stigma among PR individuals. Finally, very limited evidence awaiting replication supports the efficacy of cognitive therapies in mitigating the negative effects of stigma.ConclusionsEvidence confirms previous concerns about stigma and its negative consequences for PR individuals, thus having important public health implications

Cannabis: neuropsychiatry and its effects on brain and behavior

Editorial. [No abstract available

The effect of cross-sex hormonal treatment on gender dysphoria individuals' mental health: A systematic review

Cross-sex hormonal treatment represents a main aspect of gender dysphoria health care pathway. However, it is still debated whether this intervention translates into a better mental well-being for the individual and which mechanisms may underlie this association. Although sex reassignment surgery has been the subject of extensive investigation, few studies have specifically focused on hormonal treatment in recent years. Here, we systematically review all studies examining the effect of cross-sex hormonal treatment on mental health and well-being in gender dysphoria. Research tends to support the evidence that hormone therapy reduces symptoms of anxiety and dissociation, lowering perceived and social distress and improving quality of life and self-esteem in both male-to-female and female-to-male individuals. Instead, compared to female-to-male individuals, hormone-treated male-to-female individuals seem to benefit more in terms of a reduction in their body uneasiness and personality-related psychopathology and an amelioration of their emotional functioning. Less consistent findings support an association between hormonal treatment and other mental health-related dimensions. In particular, depression, global psychopathology, and psychosocial functioning difficulties appear to reduce only in some studies, while others do not suggest any improvement in these domains. Results from longitudinal studies support more consistently the association between hormonal treatment and improved mental health. On the contrary, a number of cross-sectional studies do not support this evidence. This review provides possible biological explanation vs psychological explanation (direct effect vs indirect effect) for the hormonal treatment-induced better mental well-being. In conclusion, this review indicates that gender dysphoria-related mental distress may benefit from hormonal treatment intervention, suggesting a transient reaction to the nonsatisfaction connected to the incongruent body image rather than a stable psychiatric comorbidity. In this perspective, timely hormonal treatment intervention represents a crucial issue in gender dysphoria individuals' mental health-related outcome

Cannabis Use in Autism: Reasons for Concern about Risk for Psychosis

Being particularly vulnerable to the pro-psychotic effects of cannabinoid exposure, autism spectrum individuals present with an increased risk of psychosis, which may be passed on to their own children. More specifically, cannabis exposure among autism spectrum individuals seems to exert disruptive epigenetic effects that can be intergenerationally inherited in brain areas which play a critical role in schizophrenia pathophysiology. Additionally, because of such cannabinoid-induced epigenetic effects, autism candidate genes present with bivalent chromatin markings which make them more vulnerable to subsequent disruption, possibly leading to psychosis onset later in life. Thus, findings support a developmental trajectory between autism and psychosis, as per endocannabinoid system modulation. However, such evidence has not received the attention it deserves

Does Cannabis Composition Matter? Differential Effects of Delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol and Cannabidiol on Human Cognition

Purpose of ReviewThe lack of clarity about the effect of cannabis use on cognition may be attributable to the considerable heterogeneity among studies in terms of cannabis composition. This article selectively reviews studies examining the distinctive effects of cannabinoids on human cognition, particularly those of delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (Δ9-THC) and cannabidiol (CBD).Recent FindingsResearch indicates that ∆9-THC administration acutely impairs cognition, particularly memory and emotional processing. Limited evidence suggests that CBD administration might improve cognition in cannabis users but not in individuals with neuropsychiatric disorders. Moreover, studies indicate that some acute Δ9-THC-induced cognitive impairments may be prevented if Δ9-THC is administered in combination or following CBD treatment. Δ9-THC and CBD have also shown opposite effects on cognition-related brain activation, possibly reflecting their antagonistic behavioral effects.SummaryResearch suggests greater cognitive impairments in individuals when exposed to high ∆9-THC or low CBD cannabis. It is unclear whether at specific concentrations CBD might outweigh any harmful effects of Δ9-THC on cognition

Cannabis and cognition: connecting the dots towards the understanding of the relationship

Several studies have advanced the understanding of the effects of cannabis on cognitive function. A comprehensive reappraisal of such literature may help in drawing conclusions about the potential risks associated with cannabis use. In summary, the evidence suggests that earlier age of use, high-frequency and high-potency cannabis use, as well as sustained use over time and use of synthetic cannabinoids, are all correlated with a higher likelihood of developing potentially severe and persistent executive function impairments. While the exact mechanisms underlying the adverse effects of cannabis on cognition are not completely clear, Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) studies support the presence of both structural and functional alterations associated with cannabis use. Cognitive dysfunction is also a core feature of many neuropsychiatric disorders and care must be taken regarding the effects of cannabis use in these patient populations. Cognitive impairments affect patients' daily functions, sociability, and long-term outcome, posing elevated economic, social, and clinical burdens. There is, thus, a compelling case for implementing behavioral and cognitive rehabilitation therapies for these patients, as well as investigating the endocannabinoid system in the development of new psychopharmacological treatments

Unraveling the Intoxicating and Therapeutic Effects of Cannabis Ingredients on Psychosis and Cognition

Research evidence suggests a dose-response relationship for the association between cannabis use and risk of psychosis. Such relationship seems to reflect an increased risk of psychosis not only as a function of frequent cannabis use, but also of high-potency cannabis use in terms of concentration of \u394-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (\u3949-THC), its main psychoactive component. This finding would be in line with the evidence that \u3949-THC administration induces transient psychosis-like symptoms in otherwise healthy individuals. Conversely, low-potency varieties would be less harmful because of their lower amount of \u3949-THC and potential compresence of another cannabinoid, cannabidiol (CBD), which seems to mitigate \u3949-THC detrimental effects. A growing body of studies begins to suggest that CBD may have not only protective effects against the psychotomimetic effects of \u3949-THC but even therapeutic properties on its own, opening new prospects for the treatment of psychosis. Despite being more limited, evidence of the effects of cannabis on cognition seems to come to similar conclusions, with increasing \u3949-THC exposure being responsible for the cognitive impairments attributed to recreational cannabis use while CBD preventing such effects and, when administered alone, enhancing cognition. Molecular evidence indicates that \u3949-THC and CBD may interact with cannabinoid receptors with almost opposite mechanisms, with \u3949-THC being a partial agonist and CBD an inverse agonist/antagonist. With the help of imaging techniques, pharmacological studies in vivo have been able to show opposite effects of \u3949-THC and CBD also on brain function. Altogether, they may account for the intoxicating and therapeutic effects of cannabis on psychosis and cognition

Prevention and early intervention in youth mental health: is it time for a multidisciplinary and trans-diagnostic model for care?

Background: Similar to other health care sectors, mental health has moved towards the secondary prevention, with the effort to detect and treat mental disorders as early as possible. However, converging evidence sheds new light on the potential of primary preventive and promotion strategies for mental health of young people. We aimed to reap- praise such evidence. Methods: We reviewed the current state of knowledge on delivering promotion and preventive interventions addressing youth mental health. Results: Half of all mental disorders start by 14 years and are usually preceded by non-specific psychosocial distur- bances potentially evolving in any major mental disorder and accounting for 45% of the global burden of disease across the 0\u201325 age span. While some action has been taken to promote the implementation of services dedicated to young people, mental health needs during this critical period are still largely unmet. This urges redesigning preven- tive strategies in a youth-focused multidisciplinary and trans-diagnostic framework which might early modify possible psychopathological trajectories. Conclusions: Evidence suggests that it would be unrealistic to consider promotion and prevention in mental health responsibility of mental health professionals alone. Integrated and multidisciplinary services are needed to increase the range of possible interventions and limit the risk of poor long-term outcome, with also potential benefits in terms of healthcare system costs. However, mental health professionals have the scientific, ethical, and moral responsibility to indicate the direction to all social, political, and other health care bodies involved in the process of meeting mental health needs during youth years

The effectiveness of lurasidone add-on for residual aggressive behavior and obsessive symptoms in antipsychotic-treated children and adolescents with Tourette syndrome: preliminary evidence from a case series

Children and adolescents with Tourette syndrome may suffer from comorbid psychological and behavioral difficulties, primarily Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder-related manifestations including impulsive, aggressive, and disruptive behavior, and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder-related disturbances. Often, such additional problems represent the major cause of disability, requiring their prioritization above the tic symptomatology. Here, we present six cases of children and adolescents with treatment-resistant Tourette syndrome aged 11-17 years, whose symptoms, especially the non-tic symptoms such as aggressive behavior and obsessive symptoms, failed to respond adequately to at least two different antipsychotics and, where deemed appropriate, to a combination with a medication with a different therapeutic indication or chemical class (e.g., antidepressant or anticonvulsant). Such symptomatic manifestations were significantly reduced by the time of the subsequent control visit planned 30 days later, by using lurasidone as an add-on therapy to risperidone or aripiprazole (all p 64 0.009). No significant neuromotor or metabolic side effects were reported in all cases in a follow-up period ranging from 4 months to 6 months, supporting the stability of the observed clinical improvement. While still investigational, the preliminary evidence presented here gives reason to hope that lurasidone could possibly be an effective option in Tourette syndrome, warranting further investigation of its potential benefits in neurodevelopmental conditions