Elsevier

Schizophrenia Research

Volume 60, Issue 1, 1 March 2003, Pages 21-32
Schizophrenia Research

Psychosis prediction: 12-month follow up of a high-risk (“prodromal”) group

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0920-9964(02)00167-6Get rights and content

Abstract

Intervention in the prodromal phase of schizophrenia and related psychoses may result in attenuation, delay or even prevention of the onset of psychosis in some individuals. However, a “prodrome” is difficult to recognise prospectively because of its nonspecific symptoms.

This study set out to recruit and follow up subjects at high risk of transition to psychosis with the aim of examining the predictive power for psychosis onset of certain mental state and illness variables.

Symptomatic individuals with either a family history of psychotic disorder, schizotypal personality disorder, subthreshold psychotic symptoms or brief transient psychotic symptoms were assessed and followed up monthly for 12 months or until psychosis onset.

Twenty of 49 subjects (40.8%) developed a psychotic disorder within 12 months. Some highly significant predictors of psychosis were found: long duration of prodromal symptoms, poor functioning at intake, low-grade psychotic symptoms, depression and disorganization. Combining some predictive variables yielded a strategy for psychosis prediction with good sensitivity (86%), specificity (91%) positive predictive value (80%) and negative predictive value (94%) within 6 months.

This study illustrates that it is possible to recruit and follow up individuals at ultra high risk of developing psychosis within a relatively brief follow-up period. Despite low numbers some highly significant predictors of psychosis were found. The findings support the development of more specific preventive strategies targeting the prodromal phase for some individuals at ultra high risk of schizophrenia.

Introduction

Schizophrenia and other psychotic disorders are usually characterized by a prepsychotic or “prodromal” phase of illness in which a change from premorbid functioning occurs. This period is characterized by various mental state features, including nonspecific symptoms such as depressed mood and anxiety as well as subthreshold or attenuated psychotic symptoms (Yung et al., 1996). Subtle subjectively experienced cognitive, vegetative and perceptual disturbances, called “basic symptoms”, have also been described Gross, 1989, Gross, 1997. The prodrome extends from a stable or premorbid phase until the time of onset of frank psychotic features Keith and Matthews, 1991, Loebel et al., 1992, Beiser et al., 1993. It may be lengthy, lasting on average between 1 and 5 years Loebel et al., 1992, Beiser et al., 1993, Häfner et al., 1993, and is often associated with substantial levels of psychosocial impairment and disability Jones et al., 1993, Yung et al., 1996. The mechanism by which this prodromal state evolves into psychosis is not really understood (Hodges et al., 1999).

One important aspect of the prodrome is that it is a period in which early intervention could occur if it could be recognized prospectively. The possibility of preventing, delaying or ameliorating the onset of diagnosable psychotic disorder then arises (McGorry, 1998). Such intervention in a subthreshold syndrome, aiming to prevent the full-blown disorder from developing, is known as ‘indicated prevention’ (Mrazek and Haggarty, 1994).

So far, however, the diverse range of symptoms and signs manifest in a psychotic prodrome has only limited predictive power in relation to subsequent psychosis, (McGorry, 1998). This cluster of symptoms may well be followed by psychosis (a true positive), or may not (a false positive). The retrospective term “prodrome” therefore cannot appropriately be applied to prospective investigations. The term “at risk mental state” (ARMS) has been suggested instead, implying that a subthreshold syndrome can be regarded as a risk factor for subsequent psychosis, but that psychosis is not inevitable (McGorry and Singh, 1995). Indicated prevention will need to be based upon the delineation of ARMS features with increased sensitivity and specificity for subsequent psychosis. Researchers in Germany have made some inroads into this search. They assessed a cohort of patients presenting with personality and neurotic disorders for presence of “basic symptoms” and then followed them up several years later. After an average follow-up period of 8 years, over 50% of the cohort had developed schizophrenia. Presence of certain ‘basic symptoms’ (subjective disturbances of attention, thinking, perception, speech and motor action) was found to be highly predictive of psychosis Klosterkötter et al., 1997, Klosterkötter et al., 2001.

This paper describes an alternative method of investigating the predictive power of some prodromal features. It builds on previous interim reports from the same sample Yung et al., 1998a, Yung et al., 1998b.

The aim of the project was to recruit and follow up putatively prodromal or ultra-high-risk (UHR) subjects, to determine the number of subjects who became psychotic within a year of study entry and to assess the predictive power of certain variables, including markers of psychopathology and disability.

It was hypothesized that the rate of transition to psychosis over 12 months would be 20–30% of cases. This estimate was based on our experience during a pilot study in a similar high-risk group in which the 12-month transition rate was 21.2% (7 of 33 cases: Yung et al., 1996). The pilot study inclusion criteria were modified for the current project in an attempt to increase the proportion of cases developing a psychosis, for example by including only first-degree relatives of psychotic patients (the pilot study also allowed the recruitment of second degree relatives). Such criteria already define a sample with massively increased risk of incidence when compared with the general population (greater than 10,000 times the risk: Jablensky, 2000).

It was also hypothesized that subjects who became psychotic would display higher levels of certain dimensions of psychopathology and other clinical features than those who did not develop psychosis. These features could then be utilised in enhancing the predictive power within the already enriched sample.

Section snippets

Setting: the PACE Clinic

The “Personal Assessment and Crisis Evaluation (PACE) Clinic” was the deliberately generic name given to the outpatient clinical service specifically developed to assess, manage and follow up putatively high-risk subjects. PACE is located at a community adolescent service for general medical as well as psychological problems. Its location was intended to promote access and avoid stigma. The rationale, development and the clinical infrastructure of this service have been described previously

Referrals

Between March 1995 to October 1996, 162 referrals were made to PACE. Telephone screening assessment of these referrals excluded 23 (14.2%), the remaining 139 (85.8%) were offered a screening interview at the PACE Clinic. Forty-four of these never attended the appointment. The reasons for this are unknown. The other 95 (58.6% of the 162 referred) were seen in the clinic by either the PACE consultant psychiatrist (ARY3) or a research psychologist (CAM, LJP, and MH4

Discussion

The search for predictors of psychosis is an important area of investigation with implications for early intervention in a subsample of the population at ultra high risk (UHR) of psychosis. This design of this study is unique in that it prospectively investigates symptomatic high-risk individuals in the peak age range of psychosis onset. This was a two-stage process. Subjects who met specific intake criteria were selected (the ‘UHR’ cohort). Enhanced prediction of psychosis within this enriched

Acknowledgements

This research was supported by a grant from the Victor Hurley Medical Research Fund and by a Research Program Grant from the Victorian Health Promotion Foundation. Our thanks also to Dr. Lorelle Drew and John Gleeson.

References (49)

  • D.E. Cameron

    Early schizophrenia

    Am. J. Psychiatry

    (1938)
  • J. Chapman

    The early symptoms of schizophrenia

    Br. J. Psychiatry

    (1966)
  • L.J. Chapman et al.

    Scales for rating psychotic and psychoticlike experiences as continua

    Schizophr. Bull.

    (1980)
  • D.J. Done et al.

    Childhood antecedents of schizophrenia and affective illness: intellectual performance at ages 7 and 11

    Schizophr. Res.

    (1994)
  • P. Faegerman

    Psychogenic Psychoses

    (1963)
  • First, M.B., Spitzer, R.L., Gibbon, M., Williams, J.B.W., 1996. Structured clinical interview for DSM-IV Axis I...
  • I.I. Gottesman et al.

    Schizophrenia: The Epigenetic Puzzle

    (1982)
  • G. Gross

    The ‘basic’ symptoms of schizophrenia

    Br. J. Psychiatry

    (1989)
  • H. Häfner et al.

    The influence of age and sex on the onset and early course of schizophrenia

    Br. J. Psychiatry

    (1993)
  • M. Hamilton

    The assessment of anxiety states by rating

    Br. J. Psychiatry

    (1959)
  • M. Hamilton

    A rating scale for depression

    J. Neurol., Neurosurg. Psychiatry

    (1960)
  • D. Heinrichs et al.

    The quality of life scale: an instrument for rating the schizophrenia deficit syndrome

    Schizophr. Bull.

    (1984)
  • A. Hodges et al.

    People at risk of schizophrenia: sample characteristics of the first 100 cases in the Edinburgh high-risk study

    Br. J. Psychiatry

    (1999)
  • A. Jablensky

    Prevalence and incidence of schizophrenia spectrum disorders: implications for prevention

    Aust. N. Z. J. Psychiatry

    (2000)
  • Cited by (955)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    1

    From 1994 to 1995: Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

    2

    From 1997 to 1999: Department of Psychiatry, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.

    View full text