Extreme deviations from the normative model reveal cortical heterogeneity and associations with negative symptom severity in first-episode psychosis from the OPTiMiSE and GAP studies.
Journal
Translational psychiatry
ISSN: 2158-3188
Titre abrégé: Transl Psychiatry
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101562664
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Dec 2023
02 Dec 2023
Historique:
received:
20
09
2022
accepted:
09
11
2023
revised:
03
11
2023
medline:
4
12
2023
pubmed:
3
12
2023
entrez:
2
12
2023
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
There is currently no quantifiable method to predict long-term clinical outcomes in patients presenting with a first episode of psychosis. A major barrier to developing useful markers for this is biological heterogeneity, where many different pathological mechanisms may underly the same set of symptoms in different individuals. Normative modelling has been used to quantify this heterogeneity in established psychotic disorders by identifying regions of the cortex which are thinner than expected based on a normative healthy population range. These brain atypicalities are measured at the individual level and therefore potentially useful in a clinical setting. However, it is still unclear whether alterations in individual brain structure can be detected at the time of the first psychotic episode, and whether they are associated with subsequent clinical outcomes. We applied normative modelling of cortical thickness to a sample of first-episode psychosis patients, with the aim of quantifying heterogeneity and to use any pattern of cortical atypicality to predict symptoms and response to antipsychotic medication at timepoints from baseline up to 95 weeks (median follow-ups = 4). T1-weighted brain magnetic resonance images from the GAP and OPTiMiSE samples were processed with Freesurfer V6.0.0 yielding 148 cortical thickness features. An existing normative model of cortical thickness (n = 37,126) was adapted to integrate data from each clinical site and account for effects of gender and site. Our test sample consisted of control participants (n = 149, mean age = 26, SD = 6.7) and patient data (n = 295, mean age = 26, SD = 6.7), this sample was used for estimating deviations from the normative model and subsequent statistical analysis. For each individual, the 148 cortical thickness features were mapped to centiles of the normative distribution and converted to z-scores reflecting the distance from the population mean. Individual cortical thickness metrics of +/- 2.6 standard deviations from the mean were considered extreme deviations from the norm. We found that no more than 6.4% of psychosis patients had extreme deviations in a single brain region (regional overlap) demonstrating a high degree of heterogeneity. Mann-Whitney U tests were run on z-scores for each region and significantly lower z-scores were observed in FEP patients in the frontal, temporal, parietal and occipital lobes. Finally, linear mixed-effects modelling showed that negative deviations in cortical thickness in parietal and temporal regions at baseline are related to more severe negative symptoms over the medium-term. This study shows that even at the early stage of symptom onset normative modelling provides a framework to identify individualised cortical markers which can be used for early personalised intervention and stratification.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38042835
doi: 10.1038/s41398-023-02661-6
pii: 10.1038/s41398-023-02661-6
pmc: PMC10693627
doi:
Substances chimiques
Antipsychotic Agents
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
373Subventions
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : P50 MH115846
Pays : United States
Organisme : NIMH NIH HHS
ID : U01 MH124639
Pays : United States
Organisme : Wellcome Trust
Pays : United Kingdom
Informations de copyright
© 2023. The Author(s).
Références
Am J Psychiatry. 2010 Jul;167(7):748-51
pubmed: 20595427
Schizophr Bull. 2021 Mar 16;47(2):444-455
pubmed: 33057670
Schizophr Res. 2016 Jul;174(1-3):165-171
pubmed: 27131912
J Neurosci Methods. 2014 Jun 15;230:37-50
pubmed: 24785589
Psychol Med. 2020 Jul;50(9):1452-1462
pubmed: 31364523
Schizophr Bull. 2006 Apr;32(2):214-9
pubmed: 16481659
JAMA Psychiatry. 2013 Oct;70(10):1031-40
pubmed: 23945954
Neuroimage. 2022 Dec 1;264:119699
pubmed: 36272672
Schizophr Bull. 2015 May;41(3):574-83
pubmed: 25800248
PLoS One. 2014 Jun 30;9(6):e101372
pubmed: 24979583
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Oct;5(10):797-807
pubmed: 30115598
JAMA Psychiatry. 2018 Apr 1;75(4):396-404
pubmed: 29450447
Biol Psychiatry. 2016 Oct 1;80(7):552-61
pubmed: 26927419
Schizophr Bull. 2014 Nov;40(6):1509-17
pubmed: 24345517
Lancet Psychiatry. 2018 Nov;5(11):885-894
pubmed: 30322824
Schizophr Res. 2015 Oct;168(1-2):84-91
pubmed: 26265299
Hum Brain Mapp. 2021 Jun 1;42(8):2546-2555
pubmed: 33638594
Psychol Med. 2023 Jun;53(8):3471-3479
pubmed: 35197142
Am J Psychiatry. 2005 Mar;162(3):441-9
pubmed: 15741458
Psychol Med. 2021 Jan;51(2):340-350
pubmed: 31858920
Schizophr Bull. 2021 Jul 8;47(4):1029-1038
pubmed: 33547470
World Psychiatry. 2014 Oct;13(3):275-87
pubmed: 25273301
JAMA Psychiatry. 2018 Nov 1;75(11):1146-1155
pubmed: 30304337
Schizophr Res. 2009 Nov;115(1):82-7
pubmed: 19775869
PLoS One. 2022 Dec 8;17(12):e0278776
pubmed: 36480551
Schizophr Res. 2012 Aug;139(1-3):218-24
pubmed: 22658528