OBJECTIVE\nMETHOD\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nA major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide... Show moreOBJECTIVE\nMETHOD\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nA major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia.\nHere, we examine this issue through two approaches: (a) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments and (b) by pooling data (N ∼ 6,000 participants) from cohorts from the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics Through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Major Depressive Disorder and ENIGMA-Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behavior.\nWe observed moderate-to-high correlations between measures, consistent with the wide range (κ range: 0.15-0.97; r range: 0.21-0.94) reported in the literature. Two common multi-item instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses identified sources of heterogeneity such as the time frame of the instrument and whether it relies on self-report or a clinical interview. Finally, construct-specific analyses suggest that suicide ideation items from common psychiatric questionnaires are most concordant with the suicide ideation construct of multi-item instruments.\nOur findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behavior but share a modest core factor with single suicidal ideation items. Retrospective, multisite collaborations including distinct instruments should be feasible provided they harmonize across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved). Show less
Objective: A major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used... Show moreObjective: A major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia. Method: Here, we examine this issue through two approaches: (a) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments and (b) by pooling data (N ∼ 6,000 participants) from cohorts from the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics Through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Major Depressive Disorder and ENIGMA–Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behavior. Results: We observed moderate-to-high correlations between measures, consistent with the wide range (κ range: 0.15–0.97; r range: 0.21–0.94) reported in the literature. Two common multi-item instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses identified sources of heterogeneity such as the time frame of the instrument and whether it relies on self-report or a clinical interview. Finally, construct-specific analyses suggest that suicide ideation items from common psychiatric questionnaires are most concordant with the suicide ideation construct of multi-item instruments. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behavior but share a modest core factor with single suicidal ideation items. Retrospective, multisite collaborations including distinct instruments should be feasible provided they harmonize across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved) Show less
Importance Large-scale neuroimaging studies have revealed group differences in cortical thickness across many psychiatric disorders. The underlying neurobiology behind these differences is not well... Show moreImportance Large-scale neuroimaging studies have revealed group differences in cortical thickness across many psychiatric disorders. The underlying neurobiology behind these differences is not well understood. Objective To determine neurobiologic correlates of group differences in cortical thickness between cases and controls in 6 disorders: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), bipolar disorder (BD), major depressive disorder (MDD), obsessive-compulsive disorder (OCD), and schizophrenia. Design, Setting, and Participants Profiles of group differences in cortical thickness between cases and controls were generated using T1-weighted magnetic resonance images. Similarity between interregional profiles of cell-specific gene expression and those in the group differences in cortical thickness were investigated in each disorder. Next, principal component analysis was used to reveal a shared profile of group difference in thickness across the disorders. Analysis for gene coexpression, clustering, and enrichment for genes associated with these disorders were conducted. Data analysis was conducted between June and December 2019. The analysis included 145 cohorts across 6 psychiatric disorders drawn from the ENIGMA consortium. The numbers of cases and controls in each of the 6 disorders were as follows: ADHD: 1814 and 1602; ASD: 1748 and 1770; BD: 1547 and 3405; MDD: 2658 and 3572; OCD: 2266 and 2007; and schizophrenia: 2688 and 3244. Main Outcomes and Measures Interregional profiles of group difference in cortical thickness between cases and controls. Results A total of 12 721 cases and 15 600 controls, ranging from ages 2 to 89 years, were included in this study. Interregional profiles of group differences in cortical thickness for each of the 6 psychiatric disorders were associated with profiles of gene expression specific to pyramidal (CA1) cells, astrocytes (except for BD), and microglia (except for OCD); collectively, gene-expression profiles of the 3 cell types explain between 25% and 54% of variance in interregional profiles of group differences in cortical thickness. Principal component analysis revealed a shared profile of difference in cortical thickness across the 6 disorders (48% variance explained); interregional profile of this principal component 1 was associated with that of the pyramidal-cell gene expression (explaining 56% of interregional variation). Coexpression analyses of these genes revealed 2 clusters: (1) a prenatal cluster enriched with genes involved in neurodevelopmental (axon guidance) processes and (2) a postnatal cluster enriched with genes involved in synaptic activity and plasticity-related processes. These clusters were enriched with genes associated with all 6 psychiatric disorders. Conclusions and Relevance In this study, shared neurobiologic processes were associated with differences in cortical thickness across multiple psychiatric disorders. These processes implicate a common role of prenatal development and postnatal functioning of the cerebral cortex in these disorders.Question What are the neurobiologic underpinnings of group differences in cortical thickness in various psychiatric disorders? Findings In this consortium analysis of data from 145 cohorts, regions of the cerebral cortex with greater expression of genes specific to pyramidal (CA1) cells were also regions with greater case-control group differences in cortical thickness in all 6 disorders: attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder, major depressive disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder, and schizophrenia. There was a common profile of group differences in cortical thickness shared among these disorders, which was associated with the expression of genes involved in neurodevelopmental processes (prenatally) and processes underlying synaptic activity and plasticity (postnatally). Meaning There are shared neurobiologic and cellular mechanisms associated with differences in cortical thickness across multiple psychiatric disorders, implicating a common role of prenatal development and postnatal functioning of the cerebral cortex.This study evaluates neurobiologic correlates of group differences in cortical thickness between cases and controls in 6 psychiatric disorders. Show less
Objective: In a previous paper, we reported about the efficacy of the addition of lamotrigine to lithium in patients with bipolar depression. In the second phase of this study paroxetine was added... Show moreObjective: In a previous paper, we reported about the efficacy of the addition of lamotrigine to lithium in patients with bipolar depression. In the second phase of this study paroxetine was added to ongoing treatment in non-responders. Method: Bipolar depressed patients (n = 124) treated with lithium were randomized to addition of lamotrigine or placebo. In non-responders after 8 weeks, paroxetine 20 mg was added for another 8 weeks to ongoing treatment. Results: After 8 weeks the improvement in patients treated with lamotrigine vs. patients treated with placebo was significant. After addition of paroxetine this difference disappeared as a result of greater further improvement in the non-responders to placebo. Conclusion: Addition of lamotrigine to lithium was found effective in bipolar depressed patients. Further addition of paroxetine in non-responders to lithium plus lamotrigine did not appear to provide additional benefit, while it appeared to do so in non-responders to lithium plus placebo. Show less
