推进首发精神病治疗反应预测:结合临床和脑电图特征。

IF 5 3区 医学 Q1 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences Pub Date : 2025-04-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-03 DOI:10.1111/pcn.13791
Livia Dominicus, Melissa Zandstra, Josephine Franse, Wim Otte, Arjan Hillebrand, Simone de Graaf, Karen Ambrosen, Birte Yding Glenthøj, Andrew Zalesky, Kirsten Borup Bojesen, Mikkel Sørensen, Floortje Scheepers, Cornelis Stam, Bob Oranje, Bjorn Ebdrup, Edwin van Dellen
{"title":"推进首发精神病治疗反应预测:结合临床和脑电图特征。","authors":"Livia Dominicus, Melissa Zandstra, Josephine Franse, Wim Otte, Arjan Hillebrand, Simone de Graaf, Karen Ambrosen, Birte Yding Glenthøj, Andrew Zalesky, Kirsten Borup Bojesen, Mikkel Sørensen, Floortje Scheepers, Cornelis Stam, Bob Oranje, Bjorn Ebdrup, Edwin van Dellen","doi":"10.1111/pcn.13791","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Prompt diagnosis and intervention are crucial for first-episode psychosis (FEP) outcomes, but predicting the response to antipsychotics remains challenging. We studied whether adding electroencephalography (EEG) characteristics improves clinical prediction models for treatment response and whether EEG-based predictors are influenced by initial treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 115 antipsychotic-naïve patients with FEP. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and sociodemographic items were included as clinical features. Additionally, we analyzed resting-state EEG data (n = 45) for (relative) power, functional connectivity, and network organization. Treatment response, measured as change in PANSS positive subscale scores (∆PANSS+), was predicted using a random forest regression model. We analyzed whether the most predictive EEG characteristics were influenced after treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The clinical model explained 12% variance in symptom reduction in the training set and 32% in the validation set. Including EEG variables in the model led to a nonsignificant increase of 2% (total 34%) explained variance in symptom reduction. High hallucination symptom scores and a more hierarchical organization of alpha band networks (tree hierarchy) were associated with ∆PANSS+ reduction. The tree hierarchy in the alpha band decreased after medication. EEG source analysis revealed that this change was driven by alterations in the degree and centrality of frontal and parietal nodes in the functional brain network.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both clinical and EEG characteristics can inform treatment response prediction in patients with FEP, but the combined model may not be beneficial over a clinical model. Nevertheless, adding a more objective marker such as EEG could be valuable in selected cases.</p>","PeriodicalId":20938,"journal":{"name":"Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences","volume":" ","pages":"187-196"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962345/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Advancing treatment response prediction in first-episode psychosis: integrating clinical and electroencephalography features.\",\"authors\":\"Livia Dominicus, Melissa Zandstra, Josephine Franse, Wim Otte, Arjan Hillebrand, Simone de Graaf, Karen Ambrosen, Birte Yding Glenthøj, Andrew Zalesky, Kirsten Borup Bojesen, Mikkel Sørensen, Floortje Scheepers, Cornelis Stam, Bob Oranje, Bjorn Ebdrup, Edwin van Dellen\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/pcn.13791\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>Prompt diagnosis and intervention are crucial for first-episode psychosis (FEP) outcomes, but predicting the response to antipsychotics remains challenging. We studied whether adding electroencephalography (EEG) characteristics improves clinical prediction models for treatment response and whether EEG-based predictors are influenced by initial treatment.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We included 115 antipsychotic-naïve patients with FEP. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and sociodemographic items were included as clinical features. Additionally, we analyzed resting-state EEG data (n = 45) for (relative) power, functional connectivity, and network organization. Treatment response, measured as change in PANSS positive subscale scores (∆PANSS+), was predicted using a random forest regression model. We analyzed whether the most predictive EEG characteristics were influenced after treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The clinical model explained 12% variance in symptom reduction in the training set and 32% in the validation set. Including EEG variables in the model led to a nonsignificant increase of 2% (total 34%) explained variance in symptom reduction. High hallucination symptom scores and a more hierarchical organization of alpha band networks (tree hierarchy) were associated with ∆PANSS+ reduction. The tree hierarchy in the alpha band decreased after medication. EEG source analysis revealed that this change was driven by alterations in the degree and centrality of frontal and parietal nodes in the functional brain network.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both clinical and EEG characteristics can inform treatment response prediction in patients with FEP, but the combined model may not be beneficial over a clinical model. Nevertheless, adding a more objective marker such as EEG could be valuable in selected cases.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20938,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"187-196\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11962345/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.13791\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/pcn.13791","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:及时诊断和干预对首发精神病(FEP)的预后至关重要,但预测对抗精神病药物的反应仍然具有挑战性。我们研究了添加脑电图(EEG)特征是否改善了治疗反应的临床预测模型,以及基于脑电图的预测模型是否受到初始治疗的影响。方法:纳入115例antipsychotic-naïve FEP患者。阳性和阴性综合征量表(PANSS)和社会人口学项目作为临床特征。此外,我们分析了静息状态EEG数据(n = 45)的(相对)功率、功能连通性和网络组织。采用随机森林回归模型预测治疗反应,以PANSS阳性子量表得分(∆PANSS+)的变化来衡量。我们分析了治疗后最具预测性的脑电图特征是否受到影响。结果:临床模型在训练集中解释了12%的症状减少方差,在验证集中解释了32%的方差。在模型中加入脑电图变量导致症状减轻的解释方差增加了2%(总34%)。较高的幻觉症状评分和更分层的α带网络组织(树状结构)与∆PANSS+降低相关。给药后α带的树状结构下降。脑电图源分析显示,这种变化是由功能性脑网络中额叶和顶叶淋巴结的程度和中心性的改变所驱动的。结论:临床和脑电图特征都可以为FEP患者的治疗反应预测提供信息,但联合模型可能并不比临床模型更有利。然而,在某些情况下,增加一个更客观的标记,如脑电图,可能是有价值的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Advancing treatment response prediction in first-episode psychosis: integrating clinical and electroencephalography features.

Aims: Prompt diagnosis and intervention are crucial for first-episode psychosis (FEP) outcomes, but predicting the response to antipsychotics remains challenging. We studied whether adding electroencephalography (EEG) characteristics improves clinical prediction models for treatment response and whether EEG-based predictors are influenced by initial treatment.

Methods: We included 115 antipsychotic-naïve patients with FEP. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) and sociodemographic items were included as clinical features. Additionally, we analyzed resting-state EEG data (n = 45) for (relative) power, functional connectivity, and network organization. Treatment response, measured as change in PANSS positive subscale scores (∆PANSS+), was predicted using a random forest regression model. We analyzed whether the most predictive EEG characteristics were influenced after treatment.

Results: The clinical model explained 12% variance in symptom reduction in the training set and 32% in the validation set. Including EEG variables in the model led to a nonsignificant increase of 2% (total 34%) explained variance in symptom reduction. High hallucination symptom scores and a more hierarchical organization of alpha band networks (tree hierarchy) were associated with ∆PANSS+ reduction. The tree hierarchy in the alpha band decreased after medication. EEG source analysis revealed that this change was driven by alterations in the degree and centrality of frontal and parietal nodes in the functional brain network.

Conclusions: Both clinical and EEG characteristics can inform treatment response prediction in patients with FEP, but the combined model may not be beneficial over a clinical model. Nevertheless, adding a more objective marker such as EEG could be valuable in selected cases.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
4.20%
发文量
181
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: PCN (Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences) Publication Frequency: Published 12 online issues a year by JSPN Content Categories: Review Articles Regular Articles Letters to the Editor Peer Review Process: All manuscripts undergo peer review by anonymous reviewers, an Editorial Board Member, and the Editor Publication Criteria: Manuscripts are accepted based on quality, originality, and significance to the readership Authors must confirm that the manuscript has not been published or submitted elsewhere and has been approved by each author
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信