Institutes
Refine
Year of publication
Document Type
- Article (39)
- Conference Proceeding (10)
- Preprint (3)
Has Fulltext
- yes (52)
Is part of the Bibliography
- no (52)
Keywords
- ADHD (11)
- Bipolar disorder (5)
- Genetics (5)
- Depression (3)
- Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (2)
- Biomarker (2)
- Brain (2)
- Comorbidity (2)
- Diagnostic markers (2)
- Dopamine (2)
Institute
- Medizin (52)
- Biowissenschaften (2)
- Psychologie und Sportwissenschaften (2)
Highlights
• A panel of 20 biomarkers was identified capable of differentiating BD patients from controls.
• Excellent discrimination between established BD patients and controls.
• Good to excellent discrimination between misdiagnosed BD patients and first onset MDD patients.
• Fair to good discrimination between pre-diagnostic BD patients and controls.
• Study demonstrates the potential utility of a protein biomarker panel as a diagnostic test for BD.
Abstract
Background: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a costly, devastating and life shortening mental disorder that is often misdiagnosed, especially on initial presentation. Misdiagnosis frequently results in ineffective treatment. We investigated the utility of a biomarker panel as a diagnostic test for BD.
Methods and findings: We performed a meta-analysis of eight case-control studies to define a diagnostic biomarker panel for BD. After validating the panel on established BD patients, we applied it to undiagnosed BD patients. We analysed 249 BD, 122 pre-diagnostic BD, 75 pre-diagnostic schizophrenia and 90 first onset major depression disorder (MDD) patients and 371 controls. The biomarker panel was identified using ten-fold cross-validation with lasso regression applied to the 87 analytes available across the meta-analysis studies.
We identified 20 protein analytes with excellent predictive performance [area under the curve (AUC) ⩾ 0.90]. Importantly, the panel had a good predictive performance (AUC 0.84) to differentiate 12 misdiagnosed BD patients from 90 first onset MDD patients, and a fair to good predictive performance (AUC 0.79) to differentiate between 110 pre-diagnostic BD patients and 184 controls. We also demonstrated the disease specificity of the panel.
Conclusions: An early and accurate diagnosis has the potential to delay or even prevent the onset of BD. This study demonstrates the potential utility of a biomarker panel as a diagnostic test for BD.
the benefits of physical activity (PA) and sleep for health, accurate and objective population-based surveillance is important. Monitor-based surveillance has potential, but the main challenge is the need for replicable outcomes from different monitors. This study investigated the agreement of movement behavior outcomes assessed with four research-grade activity monitors (i.e., Movisens Move4, ActiGraph GT3X+, GENEActiv, and Axivity AX3) in adults. Twenty-three participants wore four monitors on the non-dominant wrist simultaneously for seven days. Open-source software (GGIR) was used to estimate the daily time in sedentary, light, moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA), and sleep (movement behaviors). The prevalence of participants meeting the PA and sleep recommendations were calculated from each monitor’s data. Outcomes were deemed equivalent between monitors if the absolute standardized difference and its 95% confidence intervals (CI95%) fell within ± 0.2 standard deviations (SD) of the mean of the differences. The participants were mostly men (n = 14, 61%) and aged 36 (SD = 14) years. Pairwise confusion matrices showed that 83–87% of the daily time was equally classified into the movement categories by the different pairs of monitors. The between-monitor difference in MVPA ranged from 1 (CI95%: − 6, 7) to 8 (CI95%: 1, 15) min/day. Most of the PA and sleep metrics could be considered equivalent. The prevalence of participants meeting the PA and the sleep guidelines was 100% consistent across monitors (22 and 5 participants out of the 23, respectively). Our findings indicate that the various research-grade activity monitors investigated show high inter-instrument reliability with respect to sedentary, PA and sleep-related estimates when their raw data are processed in an identical manner. These findings may have important implications for advancement towards monitor-based PA and sleep surveillance systems.
Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) is highly heritable and the most common neurodevelopmental disorder in childhood. In recent decades, it has been appreciated that in a substantial number of cases the disorder does not remit in puberty, but persists into adulthood. Both in childhood and adulthood, ADHD is characterised by substantial comorbidity including substance use, depression, anxiety, and accidents. However, course and symptoms of the disorder and the comorbidities may fluctuate and change over time, and even age of onset in childhood has recently been questioned. Available evidence to date is poor and largely inconsistent with regard to the predictors of persistence versus remittance. Likewise, the development of comorbid disorders cannot be foreseen early on, hampering preventive measures. These facts call for a lifespan perspective on ADHD from childhood to old age. In this selective review, we summarise current knowledge of the long-term course of ADHD, with an emphasis on clinical symptom and cognitive trajectories, treatment effects over the lifespan, and the development of comorbidities. Also, we summarise current knowledge and important unresolved issues on biological factors underlying different ADHD trajectories. We conclude that a severe lack of knowledge on lifespan aspects in ADHD still exists for nearly every aspect reviewed. We encourage large-scale research efforts to overcome those knowledge gaps through appropriately granular longitudinal studies.
Highlights
• Up-to-date overview on developing new medications including candidates with novel bioloigical targets for the treatment of anxiety disorders and PTSD.
• Targeting glutamatergic, cholinergic and neurosteroid mechanisms can produce acute anxiolytic effects.
• Drugs, including psychedelics, are hypothesized to produce neuroplasticity to cause enduring clinical effects.
• Combining medication with psychological approaches may augment therapeutic efficacy.
• Advances in circuit neuroscience can be leveraged to inform the design of rationale drug targets.
Abstract
Psychiatric disorders associated with psychological trauma, stress and anxiety are a highly prevalent and increasing cause of morbidity worldwide. Current therapeutic approaches, including medication, are effective in alleviating symptoms of anxiety disorders and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), at least in some individuals, but have unwanted side-effects and do not resolve underlying pathophysiology. After a period of stagnation, there is renewed enthusiasm from public, academic and commercial parties in designing and developing drug treatments for these disorders. Here, we aim to provide a snapshot of the current state of this field that is written for neuropharmacologists, but also practicing clinicians and the interested lay-reader. After introducing currently available drug treatments, we summarize recent/ongoing clinical assessment of novel medicines for anxiety and PTSD, grouped according to primary neurochemical targets and their potential to produce acute and/or enduring therapeutic effects. The evaluation of putative treatments targeting monoamine (including psychedelics), GABA, glutamate, cannabinoid, cholinergic and neuropeptide systems, amongst others, are discussed. We emphasize the importance of designing and clinically assessing new medications based on a firm understanding of the underlying neurobiology stemming from the rapid advances being made in neuroscience. This includes harnessing neuroplasticity to bring about lasting beneficial changes in the brain rather than – as many current medications do – produce a transient attenuation of symptoms, as exemplified by combining psychotropic/cognitive enhancing drugs with psychotherapeutic approaches. We conclude by noting some of the other emerging trends in this promising new phase of drug development.
Lifestyle factors—such as diet, physical activity (PA), smoking, and alcohol consumption—have a significant impact on mortality as well as healthcare costs. Moreover, they play a crucial role in the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2). There also seems to be a link between lifestyle behaviours and insulin resistance, which is often a precursor of DM2. This study uses an enhanced Healthy Living Index (HLI) integrating accelerometric data and an Ecological Momentary Assessment (EMA) to explore differences in lifestyle between insulin-sensitive (IS) and insulin-resistant (IR) individuals. Moreover, it explores the association between lifestyle behaviours and inflammation. Analysing data from 99 participants of the mPRIME study (57 women and 42 men; mean age 49.8 years), we calculated HLI scores—ranging from 0 to 4— based on adherence to specific low-risk lifestyle behaviours, including non-smoking, adhering to a healthy diet, maximally moderate alcohol consumption, and meeting World Health Organization (WHO) PA guidelines. Insulin sensitivity was assessed using a Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were used as a proxy for inflammation. Lifestyle behaviours, represented by HLI scores, were significantly different between IS and IR individuals (U = 1529.0; p = 0.023). The difference in the HLI score between IR and IS individuals was mainly driven by lower adherence to PA recommendations in the IR group. Moreover, reduced PA was linked to increased CRP levels in the IR group (r = −0.368, p = 0.014). Our findings suggest that enhancing PA, especially among individuals with impaired insulin resistance, holds significant promise as a preventive strategy.