Cannabis and schizophrenia

BACKGROUND Schizophrenia is a mental illness causing disordered beliefs, ideas and sensations. Many people with schizophrenia smoke cannabis, and it is unclear why a large proportion do so and if the effects are harmful or beneficial. It is also unclear what the best method is to allow people with schizophrenia to alter their cannabis intake. OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of specific psychological treatments for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia.To assess the effects of antipsychotics for cannabis reduction in people with schizophrenia.To assess the effects of cannabinoids (cannabis related chemical compounds derived from cannabis or manufactured) for symptom reduction in people with schizophrenia. SEARCH METHODS We searched the Cochrane Schizophrenia Group Trials Register, 12 August 2013, which is based on regular searches of BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE, PUBMED and PsycINFO.We searched all references of articles selected for inclusion for further relevant trials. We contacted the first author of included studies for unpublished trials or data. SELECTION CRITERIA We included all randomised controlled trials involving cannabinoids and schizophrenia/schizophrenia-like illnesses, which assessed:1) treatments to reduce cannabis use in people with schizophrenia;2) the effects of cannabinoids on people with schizophrenia. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS We independently inspected citations, selected papers and then re-inspected the studies if there were discrepancies, and extracted data. For dichotomous data we calculated risk ratios (RR) and for continuous data, we calculated mean differences (MD), both with 95% confidence intervals (CI) on an intention-to-treat basis, based on a fixed-effect model. We excluded data if loss to follow-up was greater than 50%. We assessed risk of bias for included studies and used GRADE to rate the quality of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS We identified eight randomised trials, involving 530 participants, which met our selection criteria.For the cannabis reduction studies no one treatment showed superiority for reduction in cannabis use. Overall, data were poorly reported for many outcomes of interest. Our main outcomes of interest were medium-term data for cannabis use, global state, mental state, global functioning, adverse events, leaving the study early and satisfaction with treatment. 1. Reduction in cannabis use: adjunct psychological therapies (specifically about cannabis and psychosis) versus treatment as usualResults from one small study showed people receiving adjunct psychological therapies specifically about cannabis and psychosis were no more likely to reduce their intake than those receiving treatment as usual (n = 54, 1 RCT, MD -0.10, 95% CI -2.44 to 2.24, moderate quality evidence). Results for other main outcomes at medium term were also equivocal. No difference in mental state measured on the PANSS positive were observed between groups (n = 62, 1 RCT, MD -0.30 95% CI -2.55 to 1.95, moderate quality evidence). Nor for the outcome of general functioning measured using the World Health Organization Quality of Life BREF (n = 49, 1 RCT, MD 0.90 95% CI -1.15 to 2.95, moderate quality evidence). No data were reported for the other main outcomes of interest 2. Reduction in cannabis use: adjunct psychological therapy (specifically about cannabis and psychosis) versus adjunct non-specific psychoeducation One study compared specific psychological therapy aimed at cannabis reduction with general psychological therapy. At three-month follow-up, the use of cannabis in the previous four weeks was similar between treatment groups (n = 47, 1 RCT, RR 1.04 95% CI 0.62 to 1.74, moderate quality evidence). Again, at a medium-term follow-up, the average mental state scores from the Brief Pscychiatric Rating Scale-Expanded were similar between groups (n = 47, 1 RCT, MD 3.60 95% CI - 5.61 to 12.81, moderate quality evidence). No data were reported for the other main outcomes of interest: global state, general functioning, adverse events, leaving the study early and satisfaction with treatment. 3. Reduction in cannabis use: antipsychotic versus antipsychotic In a small trial comparing effectiveness of olanzapine versus risperidone for cannabis reduction, there was no difference between groups at medium-term follow-up (n = 16, 1 RCT, RR 1.80 95% CI 0.52 to 6.22, moderate quality evidence). The number of participants leaving the study early at medium term was also similar (n = 28, 1 RCT, RR 0.50 95% CI 0.19 to 1.29, moderate quality evidence). Mental state data were reported, however they were reported within the short term and no difference was observed. No data were reported for global state, general functioning, and satisfaction with treatment.With regards to adverse effects data, no study reported medium-term data. Short-term data were presented but overall, no real differences between treatment groups were observed for adverse effects. 4. Cannabinoid as treatment: cannabidiol versus amisulprideAgain, no data were reported for any of the main outcomes of interest at medium term. There were short-term data reported for mental state using the BPRS and PANSS, no overall differences in mental state were observed between treatment groups. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS Results are limited and inconclusive due to the small number and size of randomised controlled trials available and quality of data reporting within these trials. More research is needed to a) explore the effects of adjunct psychological therapy that is specifically about cannabis and psychosis as currently there is no evidence for any novel intervention being better than standard treatment,for those that use cannabis and have schizophrenia b) decide the most effective drug treatment in treating those that use cannabis and have schizophrenia, and c) assess the effectiveness of cannabidiol in treating schizophrenia. Currently evidence is insufficient to show cannabidiol has an antipsychotic effect

Clinicians' and womens' experiences of two consent pathways in a trial of timing of clamping at very preterm birth:a qualitative study

Background Recruitment to trials when birth is imminent requires offering consent at a difficult and stressful time, often with limited time. The Cord Pilot Trial assessed timing of cord clamping at very preterm birth. To ensure high risk women were not excluded we developed a two stage oral assent pathway, for use when birth was imminent. A third of women were recruited using this pathway. The aim of this study was to explore clinicians’ and women’s’ experiences of the two consent pathways. Methods A qualitative interview design with semi-structured interviews. Clinicians and women were recruited from the 8 trial sites. Results were analysed using systematic thematic analysis. Results 17 clinicians were interviewed, 11 had experience of both pathways and 6 of one stage written consent only. [DL1]Themes identified: consent as a continual process; consent as a record versus consent as a legal document; team approach; different consent pathways for different trials; balance between time and information. 23 women were interviewed, 5 had been offered oral assent and 18 one stage written consent. Themes identified: importance of staff; time and information; reasons for agreeing to consent; trial secondary in women’s minds; understanding randomisation. Conclusion Overall, clinicians thought that one stage written consent was optimal for offering consent but were positive about the use of oral assent when there is limited time for offering participation. Women were positive about their experiences, particularly about the staff who approached them. Nevertheless, there were gaps in understanding of the trial in some women’s accounts

Women's views and experiences of two alternative consent pathways for participation in a preterm intrapartum trial: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND: The Cord Pilot Trial compared alternative policies for timing of cord clamping at very preterm birth at eight UK hospitals. In addition to standard written consent, an oral assent pathway was developed for use when birth was imminent. The aim of this study was to explore women's views and experiences of two alternative consent pathways to participate in the Cord Pilot Trial. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. A total of 179 participants in the Cord Pilot Trial were sent a postal invitation to take part in interviews. Women who agreed were interviewed in person or by telephone to explore their experiences of two consent pathways for a preterm intrapartum trial. Data were analysed using inductive systematic thematic analysis. RESULTS: Twenty-three women who gave either written consent (n = 18) or oral assent followed by written consent (n = 5) to participate in the trial were interviewed. Five themes were identified: (1) understanding of the implications of randomisation, (2) importance of staff offering participation, (3) information about the trial and time to consider participation, (4) trial secondary in women's minds and (5) reasons for agreeing to take part in the trial. Experiences were similar for the two consent pathways. Women recruited by the oral assent pathway reported being given less information about the trial but felt it was sufficient to make a decision regarding participation. There were gaps in women's understanding of the trial and intervention, regardless of the consent pathway. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, women were positive about their experiences of being invited to participate in the trial. The oral assent pathway seems an acceptable option for women if the intervention is low-risk and time is limited. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN21456601 . Registered on 28 February 2013

Implementing core NICE guidelines for osteoarthritis in primary care with a model consultation (MOSAICS): a cluster randomised controlled trial

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of a model osteoarthritis consultation, compared with usual care, on physical function and uptake of NICE osteoarthritis recommendations, in adults ≥45 years consulting with peripheral joint pain in UK general practice. Method: Two-arm cluster-randomised controlled trial with baseline health survey. Eight general practices in England. Participants: 525 adults ≥45 years consulting for peripheral joint pain, amongst 28,443 population survey recipients. Four intervention practices delivered the model osteoarthritis consultation to patients consulting with peripheral joint pain; four control practices continued usual care. The primary clinical outcome of the trial was the SF-12 physical component score (PCS) at six months; the main secondary outcome was uptake of NICE core recommendations by six months, measured by osteoarthritis quality indicators. A Linear Mixed Model was used to analyse clinical outcome data (SF-12 PCS). Differences in quality indicator outcomes were assessed using logistic regression. Results: 525 eligible participants were enrolled (mean age 67.3 years, SD 10.5; 59.6% female): 288 from intervention and 237 from control practices. There were no statistically significant differences in SF-12 PCS: mean difference at the 6-month primary endpoint was -0.37 (95% CI -2.32, 1.57). Uptake of core NICE recommendations by six months was statistically significantly higher in the intervention arm compared with control: e.g. increased written exercise information, 20.5% (7.9, 28.3). Conclusion: Whilst uptake of core NICE recommendations was increased, there was no evidence of benefit of this intervention, as delivered in this pragmatic randomised trial, on the primary outcome of physical functioning at six months. Trial registration: ISRCTN06984617

Using Real-World Data to Guide Ustekinumab Dosing Strategies for Psoriasis: A Prospective Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Study.

Variation in response to biologic therapy for inflammatory diseases, such as psoriasis, is partly driven by variation in drug exposure. Real-world psoriasis data were used to develop a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model for the first-line therapeutic antibody ustekinumab. The impact of differing dosing strategies on response was explored. Data were collected from a UK prospective multicenter observational cohort (491 patients on ustekinumab monotherapy, drug levels, and anti-drug antibody measurements on 797 serum samples, 1,590 measurements of Psoriasis Area Severity Index (PASI)). Ustekinumab PKs were described with a linear one-compartment model. A maximum effect (Emax ) model inhibited progression of psoriatic skin lesions in the turnover PD mechanism describing PASI evolution while on treatment. A mixture model on half-maximal effective concentration identified a potential nonresponder group, with simulations suggesting that, in future, the model could be incorporated into a Bayesian therapeutic drug monitoring "dashboard" to individualize dosing and improve treatment outcomes

Association of Serum Ustekinumab Levels With Clinical Response in Psoriasis

Importance: High-cost biologic therapies have transformed the management of immune-mediated inflammatory diseases. To optimize outcomes and reduce costs, dose adjustment informed by measurement of circulating drug levels has been shown to be effective in various settings. However, limited evidence exists for this approach with the interleukin 12 and interleukin 23 inhibitor ustekinumab. Objective: To evaluate clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring for ustekinumab in patients with psoriasis. Design, Setting, and Participants: A prospective observational cohort of 491 adults with psoriasis was recruited to the multicenter Biomarkers of Systemic Treatment Outcomes in Psoriasis study within the British Association of Dermatologists Biologic and Immunomodulators Register from June 2009 to December 2017; samples from some patients were taken between 2009 and 2011 as part of a pilot study with the same inclusion criteria. Exposure: Serum ustekinumab level measured at any point during the dosing cycle using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Main Outcomes and Measures@ Disease activity measured using the Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PASI) score. Treatment response outcomes were PASI75 (75% reduction in PASI score from baseline [primary outcome]), PASI90 (90% reduction of PASI score from baseline), and absolute PASI score of 1.5 or less. Results: A total of 491 patients (171 women and 320 men; mean [SD] age, 45.7 [12.8] years) had 1 or more serum samples (total, 853 samples obtained 0-56 weeks from start of treatment) and 1 or more PASI scores within the first year of treatment. Antidrug antibodies were detected in only 17 of 490 patients (3.5%). Early measured drug levels (1-12 weeks after starting treatment) were associated with PASI75 response 6 months after starting treatment (odds ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71) when adjusted for baseline PASI score, age, and ustekinumab dose. However, this finding was not consistent across the other PASI outcomes (PASI90 and PASI score of ≤1.5). Conclusions and Relevance: This real-world study provides evidence that measurement of early serum ustekinumab levels could be useful to direct the treatment strategy for psoriasis. Adequate drug exposure early in the treatment cycle may be particularly important in determining clinical outcome

Defining the therapeutic range for adalimumab and predicting response in psoriasis: a multicenter prospective observational cohort study

Biologics have transformed management of inflammatory diseases. To optimize outcomes and reduce costs, dose adjustment informed by circulating drug levels has been proposed. We aimed to determine the real-world clinical utility of therapeutic drug monitoring in psoriasis. Within a multicenter (n=60) prospective observational cohort, 544 psoriasis patients were included who were on adalimumab monotherapy, with at least one serum sample and PASI (Psoriasis Area and Severity Index) score available within the first year. We present models giving individualized probabilities of response for any given drug level: a minimally effective drug level of 3.2 μg/ml discriminates responders (PASI75: 75% improvement in baseline PASI) from non-responders and gives an estimated PASI75 probability of 65% (95% CI 60-71%). At 7ug/ml, PASI75 probability is 81% (95% CI 76-86%); beyond 7ug/ml, the drug level/response curve plateaus. Crucially, drug levels are predictive of response 6 months later, whether sampled early or at steady state. We confirm serum drug level to be the most important factor determining treatment response, highlighting the need to take drug levels into account when searching for biomarkers of response. This real-world study with pragmatic drug level sampling provides evidence to support the proactive measurement of adalimumab levels in psoriasis to direct treatment strategy, and is relevant to other inflammatory diseases

Anakinra for palmoplantar pustulosis: results from a randomized, double-blind, multicentre, two staged, adaptive placebo controlled trial (APRICOT)

Background Palmoplantar pustulosis (PPP) is a rare, debilitating, chronic inflammatory skin disease affecting the hands and feet. Clinical, immunological and genetic findings suggest a pathogenic role for interleukin (IL)-1. Objective To determine whether anakinra (an IL-1 receptor antagonist) delivers therapeutic benefit for PPP. Methods A randomised (1:1), double-blind, two-staged, adaptive, UK multi-centre, placebo-controlled trial. Participants had a diagnosis of PPP (>6 months) requiring systemic therapy. Treatment was eight weeks of anakinra or placebo via daily self-administered subcutaneous injections. The primary outcome was the Palmoplantar Pustulosis Psoriasis Area and Severity Index (PPPASI) at 8 weeks. Results A total of 374 patients were screened and 64 were enrolled (31 anakinra, 33 placebo) with mean baseline PPPASI 17.8 (SD=10.5); PPP investigator’s global assessment severe (50%) or moderate (50%). The baseline adjusted mean difference in PPPASI favoured anakinra but did not demonstrate superiority in intention-to-treat analysis, -1.65, 95% CI [-4.77 to 1.47], p=0.300. Secondary objective measures including fresh pustule count (2.94, 95% CI [-26.44 to 32.33] favouring anakinra), total pustule count (-30.08, 95% CI [-83.20 to 23.05] favouring placebo), and patient-reported outcomes, similarly did not show superiority of anakinra. When modelling the impact of adherence, the PPPASI complier average causal effect (CACE) for an individual who receives ≥90% total treatment (48% anakinra group), was -3.80, 95% CI [-10.76 to 3.16], p=0.285. No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusions No evidence for superiority of anakinra was found. IL-1 blockade is not a useful intervention for the treatment of PPP

Cord pilot trial - immediate versus deferred cord clamping for very preterm birth (before 32 weeks gestation): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background: Preterm birth is the most important single determinant of adverse outcome in the United Kingdom; one in every 70 babies (1.4%) is born before 32 weeks (very preterm), yet these births account for over half of infant deaths. Deferring cord clamping allows blood flow between baby and placenta to continue for a short time. This often leads to increased neonatal blood volume at birth and may allow longer for transition to the neonatal circulation. Optimal timing for clamping the cord remains uncertain, however. The Cochrane Review suggests that deferring umbilical cord clamping for preterm births may improve outcome, but larger studies reporting substantive outcomes and with long-term follow-up are needed. Studies of the physiology of placental transfusion suggest that flow in the umbilical cord at very preterm birth may continue for several minutes. This pilot trial aims to assess the feasibility of conducting a large randomised trial comparing immediate and deferred cord clamping in the UK. Methods/Design: Women are eligible for the trial if they are expected to have a live birth before 32 weeks gestation. Exclusion criteria are known monochorionic twins or clinical evidence of twin-twin transfusion syndrome, triplet or higher order multiple pregnancy, and known major congenital malformation. The interventions will be cord clamping within 20 seconds compared with cord clamping after at least two minutes. For births with cord clamping after at least two minutes, initial neonatal care is at the bedside. For the pilot trial, outcomes include measures of recruitment, compliance with the intervention, retention of participants and data quality for the clinical outcomes. Information about the trial is available to women during their antenatal care. Women considered likely to have a very preterm birth are approached for informed consent. Randomisation is close to the time of birth. Follow-up for the women is for one year, and for the children to two years of age (corrected for gestation at birth). The target sample size is 100 to 110 mother-infant pairs recruited over 12 months at eight sites. Trial registration: ISRCTN21456601, registered on 28 February 2013