Article

Neurocognitive deficits in the (putative) prodrome and first episode of psychosis. Schizophr Res 93(1-3):266-277

University of Utah, USA.
Schizophrenia Research (Impact Factor: 4.43). 08/2007; 93(1-3):266-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.schres.2007.03.013
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT International research programs have contributed to the creation of operationally defined criteria to identify individuals at risk for schizophrenia. Although there has been substantial progress in the prospective study of the schizophrenia prodrome, the utility of current diagnostic criteria remains questionable because of the relatively low base rates of incident psychoses, the high false-positive rate and ethical concerns regarding the treatment of individuals at risk. The identification of brain based neurocognitive vulnerability markers for schizophrenia may contribute to the development of an at risk algorithm with greater predictive accuracy.
Forty subjects at risk (AR) for schizophrenia, 15 in their first episode (FE) of schizophrenia, and 36 healthy comparison (HC) subjects were administered a neurocognitive battery that assessed the domains of processing speed, working memory, verbal episodic memory, executive functioning and general intelligence.
At baseline, AR subjects showed neurocognitive deficits across all domains compared to HC subjects that were less severe than those observed in the FE sample. In preliminary analyses, AR subjects who later converted to psychosis (N=5) had greater neurocognitive impairment at baseline evaluation compared to those individuals who remained "at risk" at follow-up.
Neurocognitive deficits may be important in the pathogenesis of early psychosis and could help to define individuals at greatest risk for schizophrenia. Continued research in larger cohorts is needed to test the validity of this neurocognitive profile and its utility as a vulnerability marker.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Kristin S Cadenhead, Sep 15, 2014
0 Followers
 · 
120 Views
  • Source
    • "A growing body of literature points to pervasive neurocognitive and social cognitive impairments as fundamental aspects of the expression of schizophrenia (e.g., Cirillo and Seidman, 2003; Brewer et al., 2005; Keefe et al., 2006; Eastvold et al., 2007; Becker et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2011). Deficits in perception, speed of processing, working memory, attention, executive function, social cue perception, and social and action control are recorded even before illness onset, and are associated with poor functional, societal and occupational outcome (Green et al., 2000, 2012; Edwards et al., 2001; Lencz et al., 2006; Niendam et al., 2006; Seidman et al., 2006; Simon et al., 2007; Chan et al., 2010; Kohler et al., 2010; Billeke and Aboitiz, 2013). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The primary objective of this review article is to summarize how the neuroscience of brain plasticity, exploiting new findings in fundamental, integrative and cognitive neuroscience, is changing the therapeutic landscape for professional communities addressing brain-based disorders and disease. After considering the neurological bases of training-driven neuroplasticity, we shall describe how this neuroscience-guided perspective distinguishes this new approach from (a) the more-behavioral, traditional clinical strategies of professional therapy practitioners, and (b) an even more widely applied pharmaceutical treatment model for neurological and psychiatric treatment domains. With that background, we shall argue that neuroplasticity-based treatments will be an important part of future best-treatment practices in neurological and psychiatric medicine.
    Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 05/2014; 8:385. DOI:10.3389/fnhum.2014.00385 · 2.90 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "With this in mind, and supporting the concept of a continuum of neurocognitive function in psychotic spectrum disorders, it is possible that the factors that precipitate the transition from premorbid to prodromal stage are not necessarily distinct from those involved in the transition to psychosis. In fact, cognitive impairments were found in recent studies of neuropsychological functioning at ultra-high risk subjects (Lencz et al., 2005; Niendam et al., 2006; Eastvold et al., 2007; Simon et al., 2007; Jahshan et al., 2010; Woodberry et al., 2010; Kim et al., 2011). The study of premorbid cognitive performance could therefore make it possible to identify potential premorbid markers for the transition to prodromal stage or full-threshold psychosis. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background The dimensionality of premorbid adjustment (PA) has been a debated issue, with attempts to determine whether PA is a unitary construct or composed of several independent domains characterized by a differential deterioration pattern and specific outcome correlates. Aims This study examines the factorial structure of PA, as well as, the course and correlates of its domains. Method Retrospective study of 84 adult patients experiencing first-episode psychosis (FEP) (n = 33) and individuals with schizophrenia (SCH) (n = 51). All patients were evaluated with a comprehensive battery of instruments including clinical, functioning and neuropsychological variables. A principal component analysis accompanied by a varimax rotation method was used to examine the factor structure of the PAS-S scale. Paired t tests and Wilcoxon rank tests were used to assess the changes in PAS domains over time. Bivariate correlation analyses were performed to analyse the relationship between PAS factors and clinical, social and cognitive variables. Results PA was better explained by three factors (71.65% of the variance): Academic PA, Social PA and Socio-sexual PA. The academic domain showed higher scores of PA from childhood. Social and clinical variables were more strongly related to Social PA and Socio-sexual PA domains, and the Academic PA domain was exclusively associated with cognitive variables. Conclusion This study supports previous evidence, emphasizing the validity of dividing PA into its sub-components. A differential deterioration pattern and specific correlates were observed in each PA domains, suggesting that impairments in each PA domain might predispose individuals to develop different expressions of psychotic dimensions.
    Schizophrenia Research 12/2013; 151(1-3). DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2013.10.027 · 4.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "It is now accepted that individuals at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis also perform more poorly than healthy controls (HCs) across a range of neurocognitive domains, with a pattern of impairment similar to, but less severe than, patients who are already psychotic (Keefe et al. 2006 ; Eastvold et al. 2007 ; Giuliano et al. 2012). Cross-sectional comparisons, however, do not take into account whether UHR individuals develop psychosis or not. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Individuals at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis show reduced neurocognitive performance across domains but it is unclear which reductions are associated with transition to frank psychosis. The aim of this study was to investigate differences in baseline neurocognitive performance between UHR participants with (UHR-P) and without transition to psychosis (UHR-NP) and a healthy control (HC) group and examine neurocognitive predictors of transition over the medium to long term. Method A sample of 325 UHR participants recruited consecutively from the Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) Clinic in Melbourne and 66 HCs completed a neurocognitive assessment at baseline. The UHR group was followed up between 2.39 and 14.86 (median = 6.45) years later. Cox regression was used to investigate candidate neurocognitive predictors of psychosis onset. RESULTS: The UHR group performed more poorly than the HC group across a range of neurocognitive domains but only performance on digit symbol coding and picture completion differed between the groups. The risk of transition was only significantly associated with poorer performance on visual reproduction [hazard ratio (HR) 0.919, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.876-0.965, p = 0.001] and matrix reasoning (HR 0.938, 95% CI 0.883-0.996, p = 0.037). These remained significant even after controlling for psychopathology at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This study is the longest follow-up of an UHR sample to date. UHR status was associated with poorer neurocognitive performance compared to HCs on some tasks. Cognition at identification as UHR was not a strong predictor of risk for transition to psychosis. The results suggests the need to include more experimental paradigms that isolate discrete cognitive processes to better understand neurocognition at this early stage of illness.
    Psychological Medicine 02/2013; DOI:10.1017/S0033291713000123 · 5.43 Impact Factor
Show more