Search

Background: Incidence of first-episode psychosis (FEP) varies substantially across geographic regions. Phenotypes of subclinical psychosis (SP), such as psychotic-like experiences (PLEs) and schizotypy, present several similarities with psychosis. We aimed to examine whether SP measures varied across different sites and whether this variation was comparable with FEP incidence within the same areas. We further examined contribution of environmental and genetic factors to SP. Methods: We used data from 1497 controls recruited in 16 different sites across 6 countries. Factor scores for several psychopathological dimensions of schizotypy and PLEs were obtained using multidimensional item response theory models. Variation of these scores was assessed using multi-level regression analysis to estimate individual and between-sites variance adjusting for age, sex, education, migrant, employment and relational status, childhood adversity, and cannabis use. In the final model we added local FEP incidence as a second-level variable. Association with genetic liability was examined separately. Results: Schizotypy showed a large between-sites variation with up to 15% of variance attributable to site-level characteristics. Adding local FEP incidence to the model considerably reduced the between-sites unexplained schizotypy variance. PLEs did not show as much variation. Overall, SP was associated with younger age, migrant, unmarried, unemployed and less educated individuals, cannabis use, and childhood adversity. Both phenotypes were associated with genetic liability to schizophrenia. Conclusions: Schizotypy showed substantial between-sites variation, being more represented in areas where FEP incidence is higher. This supports the hypothesis that shared contextual factors shape the between-sites variation of psychosis across the spectrum. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: While cannabis use is a well-established risk factor for psychosis, little is known about any association between reasons for first using cannabis (RFUC) and later patterns of use and risk of psychosis. Methods: We used data from 11 sites of the multicentre European Gene-Environment Interaction (EU-GEI) case–control study. 558 first-episode psychosis patients (FEPp) and 567 population controls who had used cannabis and reported their RFUC. We ran logistic regressions to examine whether RFUC were associated with first-episode psychosis (FEP) case–control status. Path analysis then examined the relationship between RFUC, subsequent patterns of cannabis use, and case–control status. Results: Controls (86.1%) and FEPp (75.63%) were most likely to report 'because of friends' as their most common RFUC. However, 20.1% of FEPp compared to 5.8% of controls reported: 'to feel better' as their RFUC (χ2 = 50.97; p < 0.001). RFUC 'to feel better' was associated with being a FEPp (OR 1.74; 95% CI 1.03–2.95) while RFUC 'with friends' was associated with being a control (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.37–0.83). The path model indicated an association between RFUC 'to feel better' with heavy cannabis use and with FEPp-control status. Conclusions: Both FEPp and controls usually started using cannabis with their friends, but more patients than controls had begun to use 'to feel better'. People who reported their reason for first using cannabis to 'feel better' were more likely to progress to heavy use and develop a psychotic disorder than those reporting 'because of friends'. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Use of illegal stimulants is associated with an increased risk of psychotic disorder. However, the impact of stimulant use on odds of first-episode psychosis (FEP) remains unclear. Here, we aimed to describe the patterns of stimulant use and examine their impact on odds of FEP. Methods We included patients with FEP aged 18–64 years who attended psychiatric services at 17 sites across 5 European countries and Brazil, and recruited controls representative of each local population (FEP = 1130; controls = 1497). Patterns of stimulant use were described. We computed fully adjusted logistic regression models (controlling for age, sex, ethnicity, cannabis use, and education level) to estimate their association with odds of FEP. Assuming causality, we calculated the population-attributable fractions for stimulant use associated with the odds for FEP. Findings Prevalence of lifetime and recent stimulant use in the FEP sample were 14.50% and 7.88% and in controls 10.80% and 3.8%, respectively. Recent and lifetime stimulant use was associated with increased odds of FEP compared with abstainers [fully adjusted odds ratio 1.74,95% confidence interval (CI) 1.20–2.54, P =.004 and 1.62, 95% CI 1.25–2.09, P <.001, respectively]. According to PAFs, a substantial number of FEP cases (3.35% [95% CI 1.31–4.78] for recent use and 7.61% [95% CI 3.68–10.54] for lifetime use) could have been prevented if stimulants were no longer available and the odds of FEP and PAFs for lifetime and recent stimulant use varied across countries. Interpretation Illegal stimulant use has a significant and clinically relevant influence on FEP incidence, with varying impacts across countries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background and Hypothesis It is argued that availability of diagnostic models will facilitate a more rapid identification of individuals who are at a higher risk of first episode psychosis (FEP). Therefore, we developed, evaluated, and validated a diagnostic risk estimation model to classify individual with FEP and controls across six countries. Study Design We used data from a large multi-center study encompassing 2627 phenotypically well-defined participants (aged 18–64 years) recruited from six countries spanning 17 research sites, as part of the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions study. To build the diagnostic model and identify which of important factors for estimating an individual risk of FEP, we applied a binary logistic model with regularization by the least absolute shrinkage and selection operator. The model was validated employing the internal-external cross-validation approach. The model performance was assessed with the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC), calibration, sensitivity, and specificity. Study Results Having included preselected 22 predictor variables, the model was able to discriminate adults with FEP and controls with high accuracy across all six countries (rangesAUROC = 0.84–0.86). Specificity (range = 73.9–78.0%) and sensitivity (range = 75.6–79.3%) were equally good, cumulatively indicating an excellent model accuracy; though, calibration slope for the diagnostic model showed a presence of some overfitting when applied specifically to participants from France, the UK, and The Netherlands. Conclusions The new FEP model achieved a good discrimination and good calibration across six countries with different ethnic contributions supporting its robustness and good generalizability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Psychosis rates are higher among some migrant groups. We hypothesized that psychosis in migrants is associated with cumulative social disadvantage during different phases of migration. Methods: We used data from the EUropean Network of National Schizophrenia Networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) case–control study. We defined a set of three indicators of social disadvantage for each phase: pre-migration, migration and post-migration. We examined whether social disadvantage in the pre- and post-migration phases, migration adversities, and mismatch between achievements and expectations differed between first-generation migrants with first-episode psychosis and healthy first-generation migrants, and tested whether this accounted for differences in odds of psychosis in multivariable logistic regression models. Results: In total, 249 cases and 219 controls were assessed. Pre-migration (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.06–2.44, p = 0.027) and post-migration social disadvantages (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.02–3.51, p = 0.044), along with expectations/achievements mismatch (OR 1.14, 95% CI 1.03–1.26, p = 0.014) were all significantly associated with psychosis. Migration adversities (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.672–2.06, p = 0.568) were not significantly related to the outcome. Finally, we found a dose–response effect between the number of adversities across all phases and odds of psychosis (⩾6: OR 14.09, 95% CI 2.06–96.47, p = 0.007). Conclusions: The cumulative effect of social disadvantages before, during and after migration was associated with increased odds of psychosis in migrants, independently of ethnicity or length of stay in the country of arrival. Public health initiatives that address the social disadvantages that many migrants face during the whole migration process and post-migration psychological support may reduce the excess of psychosis in migrants. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In Europe, the incidence of psychotic disorder is high in certain migrant and minority ethnic groups (hence: 'minorities'). However, it is unknown how the incidence pattern for these groups varies within this continent. Our objective was to compare, across sites in France, Italy, Spain, the UK and the Netherlands, the incidence rates for minorities and the incidence rate ratios (IRRs, minorities v. the local reference population). Methods: The European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene–Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study was conducted between 2010 and 2015. We analyzed data on incident cases of non-organic psychosis (International Classification of Diseases, 10th edition, codes F20–F33) from 13 sites. Results: The standardized incidence rates for minorities, combined into one category, varied from 12.2 in Valencia to 82.5 per 100 000 in Paris. These rates were generally high at sites with high rates for the reference population, and low at sites with low rates for the reference population. IRRs for minorities (combined into one category) varied from 0.70 (95% CI 0.32–1.53) in Valencia to 2.47 (95% CI 1.66–3.69) in Paris (test for interaction: p = 0.031). At most sites, IRRs were higher for persons from non-Western countries than for those from Western countries, with the highest IRRs for individuals from sub-Saharan Africa (adjusted IRR = 3.23, 95% CI 2.66–3.93). Conclusions: Incidence rates vary by region of origin, region of destination and their combination. This suggests that they are strongly influenced by the social context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) is associated with clinical outcomes in people with a diagnosis of first-episode psychosis (FEP), but factors associated with length of DUP are still poorly understood. Aiming to obtain insights into the possible biological impact on DUP, we report genetic analyses of a large multi-center phenotypically well-defined sample encompassing individuals with a diagnosis of FEP recruited from 6 countries spanning 17 research sites, as part of the European Network of National Schizophrenia Networks Studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study. Genetic propensity was measured using polygenic scores for schizophrenia (SZ-PGS), bipolar disorder (BD-PGS), major depressive disorder (MDD-PGS), and intelligence (IQ-PGS), which were calculated based on the results from the most recent genome-wide association meta-analyses. Following imputation for missing data and log transformation of DUP to handle skewedness, the association between DUP and polygenic scores (PGS), adjusting for important confounders, was investigated with multivariable linear regression models. The sample comprised 619 individuals with a diagnosis of FEP disorders with a median age at first contact of 29.0 years (interquartile range [IQR] = 22.0–38.0). The median length of DUP in the sample was 10.1 weeks (IQR = 3.8–30.8). One SD increases in SZ-PGS, BD-PGS, MDD-PGS or IQ-PGS were not significantly associated with the length of DUP. Our results suggest that genetic variation does not contribute to the DUP in patients with a diagnosis of FEP disorders. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Ethnic minority groups in Western countries face an increased risk of psychotic disorders. Causes of this long-standing public health inequality remain poorly understood. We investigated whether social disadvantage, linguistic distance and discrimination contributed to these patterns. Methods: We used case–control data from the EUropean network of national schizophrenia networks studying Gene-Environment Interactions (EU-GEI) study, carried out in 16 centres in six countries. We recruited 1130 cases and 1497 population-based controls. Our main outcome measure was first-episode ICD-10 psychotic disorder (F20–F33), and exposures were ethnicity (white majority, black, mixed, Asian, North-African, white minority and other), generational status, social disadvantage, linguistic distance and discrimination. Age, sex, paternal age, cannabis use, childhood trauma and parental history of psychosis were included as a priori confounders. Exposures and confounders were added sequentially to multivariable logistic models, following multiple imputation for missing data. Results: Participants from any ethnic minority background had crude excess odds of psychosis [odds ratio (OR) 2.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.69–2.43], which remained after adjustment for confounders (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.31–1.98). This was progressively attenuated following further adjustment for social disadvantage (OR 1.52, 95% CI 1.22–1.89) and linguistic distance (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.95–1.57), a pattern mirrored in several specific ethnic groups. Linguistic distance and social disadvantage had stronger effects for first- and later-generation groups, respectively. Conclusion: Social disadvantage and linguistic distance, two potential markers of sociocultural exclusion, were associated with increased odds of psychotic disorder, and adjusting for these led to equivocal risk between several ethnic minority groups and the white majority. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Children and adolescents display different symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) than adults. Whilst evidence for the effectiveness of psychological interventions has been synthesised for adults, this is not directly applicable to younger people. Therefore, this systematic review and meta-analysis synthesised studies investigating the effectiveness of psychological interventions for PTSD in children, adolescents and young adults. It provides an update to previous reviews investigating interventions in children and adolescents, whilst investigating young adults for the first time. Methods: We searched published and grey literature to obtain randomised control trials assessing psychological interventions for PTSD in young people published between 2011 and 2019. Quality of studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Data were analysed using univariate random-effects meta-analysis. Results: From 15 373 records, 27 met criteria for inclusion, and 16 were eligible for meta-analysis. There was a medium pooled effect size for all psychological interventions (d = −0.44, 95% CI −0.68 to −0.20), as well as for Trauma-Focused Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (TF-CBT) and Eye Movement Desensitisation and Reprocessing (EMDR) (d = −0.30, 95% CI −0.58 to −0.02); d = −0.46, 95% CI −0.81 to −0.12). Conclusions: Some, but not all, psychological interventions commonly used to treat PTSD in adults were effective in children, adolescents and young adults. Interventions specifically adapted for younger people were also effective. Our results support the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines which suggest children and adolescents be offered TF-CBT as a first-line treatment because of a larger evidence base, despite EMDR being more effective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]