Symptom Remission and Brain Cortical Networks at First Clinical Presentation of Psychosis: The OPTiMiSE Study

Individuals with psychoses have brain alterations, particularly in frontal and temporal cortices, that may be particularly prominent, already at illness onset, in those more likely to have poorer symptom remission following treatment with the first antipsychotic. The identification of strong neuroanatomical markers of symptom remission could thus facilitate stratification and individualized treatment of patients with schizophrenia. We used magnetic resonance imaging at baseline to examine brain regional and network correlates of subsequent symptomatic remission in 167 medication-naïve or minimally treated patients with first-episode schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder entering a three-phase trial, at seven sites. Patients in remission at the end of each phase were randomized to treatment as usual, with or without an adjunctive psycho-social intervention for medication adherence. The final follow-up visit was at 74 weeks. A total of 108 patients (70%) were in remission at Week 4, 85 (55%) at Week 22, and 97 (63%) at Week 74. We found no baseline regional differences in volumes, cortical thickness, surface area, or local gyrification between patients who did or did not achieved remission at any time point. However, patients not in remission at Week 74, at baseline showed reduced structural connectivity across frontal, anterior cingulate, and insular cortices. A similar pattern was evident in patients not in remission at Week 4 and Week 22, although not significantly. Lack of symptom remission in first-episode psychosis is not associated with regional brain alterations at illness onset. Instead, when the illness becomes a stable entity, its association with the altered organization of cortical gyrification becomes more defined

Correction: Stratification and prediction of remission in first-episode psychosis patients: the OPTiMiSE cohort study (vol 9, 20, 2019) : Stratification and prediction of remission in first-episode psychosis patients: the OPTiMiSE cohort study (Translational Psychiatry, (2019), 9, 1, (20), 10.1038/s41398-018-0366-5)

The original Article did not feature the list of collaborators. This has now been corrected in the PDF and HTML versions of this Article

Stratification and prediction of remission in first-episode psychosis patients : the OPTiMiSE cohort study

Early response to first-line antipsychotic treatments is strongly associated with positive long-term symptomatic and functional outcome in psychosis. Unfortunately, attempts to identify reliable predictors of treatment response in first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients have not yet been successful. One reason for this could be that FEP patients are highly heterogeneous in terms of symptom expression and underlying disease biological mechanisms, thereby impeding the identification of one-size-fits-all predictors of treatment response. We have used a clustering approach to stratify 325 FEP patients into four clinical subtypes, termed C1A, C1B, C2A and C2B, based on their symptoms assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale. Compared to C1B, C2A and C2B patients, those from the C1A subtype exhibited the most severe symptoms and were the most at risk of being non-remitters when treated with the second-generation antipsychotic drug amisulpride. Before treatment, C1A patients exhibited higher serum levels of several pro-inflammatory cytokines and inflammation-associated biomarkers therefore validating our stratification approach on external biological measures. Most importantly, in the C1A subtype, but not others, lower serum levels of interleukin (IL)-15, higher serum levels of C-X-C motif chemokine 12 (CXCL12), previous exposure to cytomegalovirus (CMV), use of recreational drugs and being younger were all associated with higher odds of being non-remitters 4 weeks after treatment. The predictive value of this model was good (mean area under the curve (AUC) = 0.73 ± 0.10), and its specificity and sensitivity were 45 ± 0.09% and 83 ± 0.03%, respectively. Further validation and replication of these results in clinical trials would pave the way for the development of a blood-based assisted clinical decision support system in psychosis

Amisulpride and olanzapine followed by open-label treatment with clozapine in first-episode schizophrenia and schizophreniform disorder (OPTiMiSE): a three-phase switching study

BACKGROUND No established treatment algorithm exists for patients with schizophrenia. Whether switching antipsychotics or early use of clozapine improves outcome in (first-episode) schizophrenia is unknown. METHODS This three-phase study was done in 27 centres, consisting of general hospitals and psychiatric specialty clinics, in 14 European countries and Israel. Patients aged 18-40 years who met criteria of the DSM-IV for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder were treated for 4 weeks with up to 800 mg/day amisulpride orally in an open-label design (phase 1). Patients who did not meet symptomatic remission criteria at 4 weeks were randomly assigned to continue amisulpride or switch to olanzapine (≤20 mg/day) during a 6-week double-blind phase, with patients and staff masked to treatment allocation (phase 2). Randomisation was done online by a randomisation website; the application implemented stratification by site and sex, and applied the minimisation method for randomisation. Patients who were not in remission at 10 weeks were given clozapine (≤900 mg/day) for an additional 12 weeks in an open-label design (phase 3). The primary outcome was the number of patients who achieved symptomatic remission at the final visits of phases 1, 2, and 3, measured by intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analysed with a generalised linear mixed model, with a logistic link and binomial error distribution. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01248195, and closed to accrual. FINDINGS Between May 26, 2011, and May 15, 2016, we recruited 481 participants who signed informed consent. Of the 446 patients in the intention-to-treat sample, 371 (83%) completed open-label amisulpride treatment, and 250 (56%) achieved remission after phase 1. 93 patients who were not in remission continued to the 6-week double-blind switching trial, with 72 (77%) patients completing the trial (39 on olanzapine and 33 on amisulpride); 15 (45%) patients on amisulpride versus 17 (44%) on olanzapine achieved remission (p=0·87). Of the 40 patients who were not in remission after 10 weeks of treatment, 28 (70%) started on clozapine; 18 (64%) patients completed the 12-week treatment, and five (28%) achieved remission. The number of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment arms in phase 2: one patient on olanzapine was admitted to hospital because of an epileptic seizure, and one patient on amisulpride was admitted to hospital twice because of exacerbations of psychotic symptoms. Over the course of the trial, two serious suicide attempts were reported. INTERPRETATION For most patients in the early stages of schizophrenia, symptomatic remission can be achieved using a simple treatment algorithm comprising the sequential administration of amisulpride and clozapine. Since switching to olanzapine did not improve outcome, clozapine should be used after patients fail a single antipsychotic trial-not until two antipsychotics have been tried, as is the current recommendation. FUNDING European Commission Seventh Framework Program

Informed consent in randomised controlled trials: further development and evaluation of the participatory and informed consent (PIC) measure.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an accepted ethical and legal prerequisite for trial participation, yet there is no standardised method of assessing patient understanding for informed consent. The participatory and informed consent (PIC) measure was developed for application to recruitment discussions to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding. Preliminary evaluation of the PIC indicated the need to improve inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ratings and conduct further psychometric evaluation. This paper describes the assessment, revision and evaluation of the PIC within the context of OPTiMISE, a pragmatic primary care-based trial. METHODS: This study used multiple methods across two phases. In phase one, one researcher applied the existing PIC measure to 18 audio-recorded recruitment discussions from the OPTiMISE study and made detailed observational notes about any uncertainties in application. Appointments were sampled to be maximally diverse for patient gender, study centre, recruiter and before and after an intervention to optimise information provision. Application uncertainties were reviewed by the study team, revisions made and a coding manual developed and agreed. In phase two, the coding manual was used to develop tailored guidelines for applying the PIC to appointments within the OPTiMISE trial. Two researchers then assessed 27 further appointments, purposively sampled as above, to evaluate inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, content validity and feasibility. RESULTS: Application of the PIC to 18 audio-recorded OPTiMISE recruitment discussions resulted in harmonisation of the scales rating recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding, minor amendments to clarify wording and the development of detailed generic coding guidelines for applying the measure within any trial. Application of the revised measure using these guidelines to 27 further recruitment discussions showed good feasibility (time to complete), content validity (completion rate) and reliability (inter- and intra-rater) of the measure. CONCLUSION: The PIC provides a means to evaluate the content of information provided by recruiters, patient participation in recruitment discussions and, to some extent, evidence of patient understanding. Future work will use the measure to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding both across and within trials

Informed consent in randomised controlled trials: further development and evaluation of the participatory and informed consent (PIC) measure

Abstract Background Informed consent is an accepted ethical and legal prerequisite for trial participation, yet there is no standardised method of assessing patient understanding for informed consent. The participatory and informed consent (PIC) measure was developed for application to recruitment discussions to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding. Preliminary evaluation of the PIC indicated the need to improve inter-rater and intra-rater reliability ratings and conduct further psychometric evaluation. This paper describes the assessment, revision and evaluation of the PIC within the context of OPTiMISE, a pragmatic primary care-based trial. Methods This study used multiple methods across two phases. In phase one, one researcher applied the existing PIC measure to 18 audio-recorded recruitment discussions from the OPTiMISE study and made detailed observational notes about any uncertainties in application. Appointments were sampled to be maximally diverse for patient gender, study centre, recruiter and before and after an intervention to optimise information provision. Application uncertainties were reviewed by the study team, revisions made and a coding manual developed and agreed. In phase two, the coding manual was used to develop tailored guidelines for applying the PIC to appointments within the OPTiMISE trial. Two researchers then assessed 27 further appointments, purposively sampled as above, to evaluate inter-rater and intra-rater reliability, content validity and feasibility. Results Application of the PIC to 18 audio-recorded OPTiMISE recruitment discussions resulted in harmonisation of the scales rating recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding, minor amendments to clarify wording and the development of detailed generic coding guidelines for applying the measure within any trial. Application of the revised measure using these guidelines to 27 further recruitment discussions showed good feasibility (time to complete), content validity (completion rate) and reliability (inter- and intra-rater) of the measure. Conclusion The PIC provides a means to evaluate the content of information provided by recruiters, patient participation in recruitment discussions and, to some extent, evidence of patient understanding. Future work will use the measure to evaluate recruiter information provision and evidence of patient understanding both across and within trials

Amisulpride and olanzapine followed by open-label treatment with clozapine in first-episode schizophrenia and schizophreniform disorder (OPTiMiSE): a three-phase switching study.

BACKGROUND: No established treatment algorithm exists for patients with schizophrenia. Whether switching antipsychotics or early use of clozapine improves outcome in (first-episode) schizophrenia is unknown. METHODS: This three-phase study was done in 27 centres, consisting of general hospitals and psychiatric specialty clinics, in 14 European countries and Israel. Patients aged 18-40 years who met criteria of the DSM-IV for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder were treated for 4 weeks with up to 800 mg/day amisulpride orally in an open-label design (phase 1). Patients who did not meet symptomatic remission criteria at 4 weeks were randomly assigned to continue amisulpride or switch to olanzapine (≤20 mg/day) during a 6-week double-blind phase, with patients and staff masked to treatment allocation (phase 2). Randomisation was done online by a randomisation website; the application implemented stratification by site and sex, and applied the minimisation method for randomisation. Patients who were not in remission at 10 weeks were given clozapine (≤900 mg/day) for an additional 12 weeks in an open-label design (phase 3). The primary outcome was the number of patients who achieved symptomatic remission at the final visits of phases 1, 2, and 3, measured by intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analysed with a generalised linear mixed model, with a logistic link and binomial error distribution. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01248195, and closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between May 26, 2011, and May 15, 2016, we recruited 481 participants who signed informed consent. Of the 446 patients in the intention-to-treat sample, 371 (83%) completed open-label amisulpride treatment, and 250 (56%) achieved remission after phase 1. 93 patients who were not in remission continued to the 6-week double-blind switching trial, with 72 (77%) patients completing the trial (39 on olanzapine and 33 on amisulpride); 15 (45%) patients on amisulpride versus 17 (44%) on olanzapine achieved remission (p=0·87). Of the 40 patients who were not in remission after 10 weeks of treatment, 28 (70%) started on clozapine; 18 (64%) patients completed the 12-week treatment, and five (28%) achieved remission. The number of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment arms in phase 2: one patient on olanzapine was admitted to hospital because of an epileptic seizure, and one patient on amisulpride was admitted to hospital twice because of exacerbations of psychotic symptoms. Over the course of the trial, two serious suicide attempts were reported. INTERPRETATION: For most patients in the early stages of schizophrenia, symptomatic remission can be achieved using a simple treatment algorithm comprising the sequential administration of amisulpride and clozapine. Since switching to olanzapine did not improve outcome, clozapine should be used after patients fail a single antipsychotic trial-not until two antipsychotics have been tried, as is the current recommendation. FUNDING: European Commission Seventh Framework Program.status: publishe

Amisulpride and olanzapine followed by open-label treatment with clozapine in first-episode schizophrenia and schizophreniform disorder (OPTiMiSE) : a three-phase switching study

BACKGROUND: No established treatment algorithm exists for patients with schizophrenia. Whether switching antipsychotics or early use of clozapine improves outcome in (first-episode) schizophrenia is unknown. METHODS: This three-phase study was done in 27 centres, consisting of general hospitals and psychiatric specialty clinics, in 14 European countries and Israel. Patients aged 18-40 years who met criteria of the DSM-IV for schizophrenia, schizophreniform disorder, or schizoaffective disorder were treated for 4 weeks with up to 800 mg/day amisulpride orally in an open-label design (phase 1). Patients who did not meet symptomatic remission criteria at 4 weeks were randomly assigned to continue amisulpride or switch to olanzapine (≤20 mg/day) during a 6-week double-blind phase, with patients and staff masked to treatment allocation (phase 2). Randomisation was done online by a randomisation website; the application implemented stratification by site and sex, and applied the minimisation method for randomisation. Patients who were not in remission at 10 weeks were given clozapine (≤900 mg/day) for an additional 12 weeks in an open-label design (phase 3). The primary outcome was the number of patients who achieved symptomatic remission at the final visits of phases 1, 2, and 3, measured by intention-to-treat analysis. Data were analysed with a generalised linear mixed model, with a logistic link and binomial error distribution. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01248195, and closed to accrual. FINDINGS: Between May 26, 2011, and May 15, 2016, we recruited 481 participants who signed informed consent. Of the 446 patients in the intention-to-treat sample, 371 (83%) completed open-label amisulpride treatment, and 250 (56%) achieved remission after phase 1. 93 patients who were not in remission continued to the 6-week double-blind switching trial, with 72 (77%) patients completing the trial (39 on olanzapine and 33 on amisulpride); 15 (45%) patients on amisulpride versus 17 (44%) on olanzapine achieved remission (p=0·87). Of the 40 patients who were not in remission after 10 weeks of treatment, 28 (70%) started on clozapine; 18 (64%) patients completed the 12-week treatment, and five (28%) achieved remission. The number of serious adverse events did not differ between the treatment arms in phase 2: one patient on olanzapine was admitted to hospital because of an epileptic seizure, and one patient on amisulpride was admitted to hospital twice because of exacerbations of psychotic symptoms. Over the course of the trial, two serious suicide attempts were reported. INTERPRETATION: For most patients in the early stages of schizophrenia, symptomatic remission can be achieved using a simple treatment algorithm comprising the sequential administration of amisulpride and clozapine. Since switching to olanzapine did not improve outcome, clozapine should be used after patients fail a single antipsychotic trial-not until two antipsychotics have been tried, as is the current recommendation. FUNDING: European Commission Seventh Framework Program

Stratification and prediction of remission in first-episode psychosis patients: the OPTiMiSE cohort study

Early response to first-line antipsychotic treatments is strongly associated with positive long-term symptomatic and functional outcome in psychosis. Unfortunately, attempts to identify reliable predictors of treatment response in first-episode psychosis (FEP) patients have not yet been successful. One reason for this could be that FEP patients are highly heterogeneous in terms of symptom expression and underlying disease biological mechanisms, thereby impeding the identification of one-size-fits-all predictors of treatment response. We have used a clustering approach to stratify 325 FEP patients into four clinical subtypes, termed C1A, C1B, C2A and C2B, based on their symptoms assessed using the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) scale. Compared to C1B, C2A and C2B patients, those from the C1A subtype exhibited the most severe symptoms and were the most at risk of being non-remitters when treated with the second-generation antipsychotic drug amisulpride. Before treatment, C1A patients exhibited higher serum levels of several pro-inflammatory cytokines and inflammation-associated biomarkers therefore validating our stratification approach on external biological measures. Most importantly, in the C1A subtype, but not others, lower serum levels of interleukin (IL)-15, higher serum levels of C-X-C motif chemokine 12 (CXCL12), previous exposure to cytomegalovirus (CMV), use of recreational drugs and being younger were all associated with higher odds of being non-remitters 4 weeks after treatment. The predictive value of this model was good (mean area under the curve (AUC) = 0.73 +/- 0.10), and its specificity and sensitivity were 45 +/- 0.09% and 83 +/- 0.03%, respectively. Further validation and replication of these results in clinical trials would pave the way for the development of a blood-based assisted clinical decision support system in psychosis