From the Journals

Early psychosis: No need for antipsychotics to recover?


 

Two new studies highlight the importance of early intervention in first-episode psychosis (FEP).

In the first study, Australian investigators conclude that, for some FEP patients, early psychosocial interventions may fend off the need for immediate treatment with antipsychotic medications.

In the second study, UK researchers show that long duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) is linked to a significantly reduced treatment response.

For both studies, the findings highlight the importance of rapid access to a comprehensive range of treatments in the first weeks after FEP onset.

“In a select group of people with first-episode psychosis, we found there was no difference in symptoms and functioning between those who had antipsychotic medication and those who didn’t,” lead author Shona M. Francey, PhD, clinical psychologist at Orygen, the National Center of Excellence in Youth Mental Health, Parkville, Australia, told Medscape Medical News.

“These findings supported our idea that, in the early phases of psychosis, with close monitoring and good psychosocial intervention, antipsychotic medication can be delayed,” Francey said.

The Australian study was published in Schizophrenia Bulletin Open. The British study was published in Lancet Psychiatry.

Adverse effects

Francey and colleagues note that, in comparison with standard treatment, early interventions produce superior outcomes for patients with psychosis. Although there are a variety of treatment options, low-dose second-generation antipsychotics typically play a central role.

However, atypical antipsychotics have rapid metabolic side effects, including weight gain and altered glucose metabolism, that increase the risk for cardiovascular disease and premature mortality. Importantly, such adverse effects are amplified among patients with FEP, who tend to be younger and treatment naive.

On the other hand, a growing body of evidence shows the benefit of nonpharmacologic interventions for patients with FEP, the investigators note. In addition, clinical staging models appear to support the use of less aggressive treatment early in the disease course.

“We have been working in early intervention for psychosis for a number of years and have found it’s possible to intervene early with young people and either prevent the onset of psychosis or ameliorate its impact,” said Francey.

“Since we can see some improvement in people in the prepsychotic phase, we wanted to know if we can also see some benefit without medication after the onset of what we would call full-threshold psychosis,” she added.

Staged Treatment and Acceptability Guidelines in Early Psychosis (STAGES) was a 6-month, triple-blind, randomized controlled noninferiority study that included 90 participants between the ages of 15 and 25 years who had FEP.

To maximize safety, patients were required to have low levels of suicidality and aggression, a DUP of less than 6 months, and to be living in stable accommodation with social support.

Participants were randomly assigned to two groups – one in which patients underwent intensive psychosocial therapy and received low-dose antipsychotic medication (n = 44), and one in which patients underwent intensive psychosocial therapy and were given placebo (n = 46).

Depending on the timing of study enrollment, those in the medication group received risperidone 1 mg or paliperidone 3 mg.

The psychosocial intervention consisted of cognitive-behavioral case management (CBCM), an intervention developed specifically for patients with early psychosis that is strongly focused on therapeutic engagement.

CBCM delivers formulation-driven cognitive-behavioral therapy and psychoeducation within a therapeutic case management framework, Francey said.

The primary outcome was level of functioning at 6, 12, and 24 months, as measured by the Social and Occupational Functioning Scale (SOFAS). The primary prespecified endpoint was outcome at 6 months. A noninferiority margin of 10.5 on the SOFAS was used as the smallest value representing a clinically important effect.

Other assessment tools included the BPRS-4 to test for positive psychotic symptoms, the Scale for the Assessment of Negative Symptoms (SANS), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, and the Hamilton Rating Scale for Anxiety.

At baseline, the two treatment groups were comparable with respect to all measures of functioning and psychopathology.

The study’s discontinuation rate was high. At 6 months, only 16 patients in the psychosocial group had completed therapy, compared with 11 in the antipsychotic group.

At this point, the two groups were comparable in terms of psychopathology and functioning ratings. Both groups had lower symptoms, higher functioning scores, and higher Quality of Life Scale (QLS) scores than at baseline.

SOFAS scores were not significantly different between the groups at this time point. The mean score was 61.7 ± 16.8 in the psychosocial group and 61.5 ± 13.4 in the medication group.

The researchers note that, because the upper limit of the confidence interval (CI) was less than the study’s a priori inferiority margin of 10.5, psychosocial therapy was not inferior to medication at the 6-month assessment point.

Pages

Next Article: