Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/bcuthbert
Bruce N Cuthbert
The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project constitutes a translational framework for psychopathology research, initiated by the National Institute of Mental Health in an attempt to provide new avenues for research to circumvent problems emerging from the use of symptom-based diagnostic categories in diagnosing disorders. The RDoC alternative is a focus on psychopathology based on dimensions simultaneously defined by observable behavior (including quantitative measures of cognitive or affective behavior) and neurobiological measures. Key features of the RDoC framework include an emphasis on functional dimensions that range from normal to abnormal, integration of multiple measures in study designs (which can foster computational approaches), and high priority on studies of neurodevelopment and environmental influences (and their interaction) that can contribute to advances in understanding the etiology of disorders throughout the lifespan. The paper highlights key implications for ways in which RDoC can contribute to future ideas about classification, as well as some of the considerations involved in translating basic behavioral and neuroscience data to psychopathology. .
{"title":"The role of RDoC in future classification of mental disorders\u2029.","authors":"Bruce N Cuthbert","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/bcuthbert","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/bcuthbert","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) project constitutes a translational framework for psychopathology research, initiated by the National Institute of Mental Health in an attempt to provide new avenues for research to circumvent problems emerging from the use of symptom-based diagnostic categories in diagnosing disorders. The RDoC alternative is a focus on psychopathology based on dimensions simultaneously defined by observable behavior (including quantitative measures of cognitive or affective behavior) and neurobiological measures. Key features of the RDoC framework include an emphasis on functional dimensions that range from normal to abnormal, integration of multiple measures in study designs (which can foster computational approaches), and high priority on studies of neurodevelopment and environmental influences (and their interaction) that can contribute to advances in understanding the etiology of disorders throughout the lifespan. The paper highlights key implications for ways in which RDoC can contribute to future ideas about classification, as well as some of the considerations involved in translating basic behavioral and neuroscience data to psychopathology.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"81-85"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b6/2c/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-81.PMC7365298.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38190211","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Classification of Mental Disorders","authors":"","doi":"10.31887/dcns.2020.22.1","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/dcns.2020.22.1","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"50 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79649387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff
Paul Hoff, Anke Maatz, Johannes Simon Vetter
Ever since psychiatry emerged as a clinical discipline and field of scientific inquiry in the late 18th century, debates about diagnosis have been at its very heart. Considered by many a requirement for clinical communication as well as for systematic study, others have critiqued psychiatric diagnosis for being modeled on a medical conception of disease that is ill-suited to the specific nature of mental disorders. Based on a review of seminal positions in the conceptual history of psychiatry and an examination of their epistemological underpinnings, we propose to consider diagnosis as dialogue. Such understanding, we argue, can serve as a meta-framework that provides a conceptual and practical umbrella to encourage open-minded conversation across the diverse conceptual and experiential frameworks that are characteristic of psychiatry. In this perspective psychopathology will also reinforce the interpersonal realm as a necessary element of any clinical encounter, be it diagnostic in purpose or otherwise. Current challenges to traditional diagnostic systems like Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) are discussed in light of these considerations. .
{"title":"Diagnosis as dialogue: historical and current perspectives\u2029.","authors":"Paul Hoff, Anke Maatz, Johannes Simon Vetter","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/phoff","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Ever since psychiatry emerged as a clinical discipline and field of scientific inquiry in the late 18th century, debates about diagnosis have been at its very heart. Considered by many a requirement for clinical communication as well as for systematic study, others have critiqued psychiatric diagnosis for being modeled on a medical conception of disease that is ill-suited to the specific nature of mental disorders. Based on a review of seminal positions in the conceptual history of psychiatry and an examination of their epistemological underpinnings, we propose to consider diagnosis as dialogue. Such understanding, we argue, can serve as a meta-framework that provides a conceptual and practical umbrella to encourage open-minded conversation across the diverse conceptual and experiential frameworks that are characteristic of psychiatry. In this perspective psychopathology will also reinforce the interpersonal realm as a necessary element of any clinical encounter, be it diagnostic in purpose or otherwise. Current challenges to traditional diagnostic systems like Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) and Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) are discussed in light of these considerations.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"27-35"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/8d/ba/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-27.PMC7365291.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189721","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/fthibaut
Florence Thibaut
The traditional categorical classification system and new diagnostic systems will be discussed in this issue. .
本文将讨论传统的分类分类系统和新的诊断系统。 。
{"title":"Do we need to rethink our current classifications of mental disorders?\u2029.","authors":"Florence Thibaut","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/fthibaut","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/fthibaut","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The traditional categorical classification system and new diagnostic systems will be discussed in this issue.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"3-4"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/b9/0d/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-3.PMC7365292.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189719","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/jfoucher
Jack R Foucher, Micha Gawlik, Julian N Roth, Clément de Crespin de Billy, Ludovic C Jeanjean, Alexandre Obrecht, Olivier Mainberger, Julie M E Clauss, Julien Elowe, Sébastien Weibel, Benoit Schorr, Marcelo Cetkovich, Carlos Morra, Federico Rebok, Thomas A Ban, Barbara Bollmann, Mathilde M Roser, Markus S Hanke, Burkhard E Jabs, Ernst J Franzek, Fabrice Berna, Bruno Pfuhlmann
While the ICD-DSM paradigm has been a major advance in clinical psychiatry, its usefulness for biological psychiatry is debated. By defining consensus-based disorders rather than empirically driven phenotypes, consensus classifications were not an implementation of the biomedical paradigm. In the field of endogenous psychoses, the Wernicke-Kleist-Leonhard (WKL) pathway has optimized the descriptions of 35 major phenotypes using common medical heuristics on lifelong diachronic observations. Regarding their construct validity, WKL phenotypes have good reliability and predictive and face validity. WKL phenotypes come with remarkable evidence for differential validity on age of onset, familiality, pregnancy complications, precipitating factors, and treatment response. Most impressive is the replicated separation of high- and low-familiality phenotypes. Created in the purest tradition of the biomedical paradigm, the WKL phenotypes deserve to be contrasted as credible alternatives with other approaches currently under discussion. .
{"title":"Wernicke-Kleist-Leonhard phenotypes \u2028of endogenous psychoses: a review of their validity\u2029.","authors":"Jack R Foucher, Micha Gawlik, Julian N Roth, Clément de Crespin de Billy, Ludovic C Jeanjean, Alexandre Obrecht, Olivier Mainberger, Julie M E Clauss, Julien Elowe, Sébastien Weibel, Benoit Schorr, Marcelo Cetkovich, Carlos Morra, Federico Rebok, Thomas A Ban, Barbara Bollmann, Mathilde M Roser, Markus S Hanke, Burkhard E Jabs, Ernst J Franzek, Fabrice Berna, Bruno Pfuhlmann","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/jfoucher","DOIUrl":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/jfoucher","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>While the ICD-DSM paradigm has been a major advance in clinical psychiatry, its usefulness for biological psychiatry is debated. By defining consensus-based disorders rather than empirically driven phenotypes, consensus classifications were not an implementation of the biomedical paradigm. In the field of endogenous psychoses, the Wernicke-Kleist-Leonhard (WKL) pathway has optimized the descriptions of 35 major phenotypes using common medical heuristics on lifelong diachronic observations. Regarding their construct validity, WKL phenotypes have good reliability and predictive and face validity. WKL phenotypes come with remarkable evidence for differential validity on age of onset, familiality, pregnancy complications, precipitating factors, and treatment response. Most impressive is the replicated separation of high- and low-familiality phenotypes. Created in the purest tradition of the biomedical paradigm, the WKL phenotypes deserve to be contrasted as credible alternatives with other approaches currently under discussion.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"37-49"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c4/52/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-37.PMC7365293.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189723","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/macrocq
Deborah J Morris-Rosendahl, Marc-Antoine Crocq
This article describes the history of the diagnostic class of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) up to DSM-5. We further analyze how the development of genetics will transform the classification and diagnosis of NDDs. In DSM-5, NDDs include intellectual disability (ID), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Physicians in German-, French- and English-speaking countries (eg, Weikard, Georget, Esquirol, Down, Asperger, and Kanner) contributed to the phenomenological definitions of these disorders throughout the 18th and 20th centuries. These diagnostic categories show considerable comorbidity and phenotypic overlap. NDDs are one of the chapters of psychiatric nosology most likely to benefit from the approach advocated by the National Institute of Mental Health's Research Domain Criteria project. Genetic research supports the hypothesis that ID, ASD, ADHD, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder lie on a neurodevelopmental continuum. The identification of recurrently observed copy number variants and disruptive gene variants in ASD (eg, CDH8, 16p11.2, SCN2A) led to the adoption of the genotype-first approach to characterize individuals at the etiological level. .
{"title":"Neurodevelopmental disorders-the history and future of a diagnostic concept\u2029.","authors":"Deborah J Morris-Rosendahl, Marc-Antoine Crocq","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/macrocq","DOIUrl":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/macrocq","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article describes the history of the diagnostic class of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) up to DSM-5. We further analyze how the development of genetics will transform the classification and diagnosis of NDDs. In DSM-5, NDDs include intellectual disability (ID), autism spectrum disorder (ASD), and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). Physicians in German-, French- and English-speaking countries (eg, Weikard, Georget, Esquirol, Down, Asperger, and Kanner) contributed to the phenomenological definitions of these disorders throughout the 18th and 20th centuries. These diagnostic categories show considerable comorbidity and phenotypic overlap. NDDs are one of the chapters of psychiatric nosology most likely to benefit from the approach advocated by the National Institute of Mental Health's Research Domain Criteria project. Genetic research supports the hypothesis that ID, ASD, ADHD, schizophrenia, and bipolar disorder lie on a neurodevelopmental continuum. The identification of recurrently observed copy number variants and disruptive gene variants in ASD (eg, CDH8, 16p11.2, SCN2A) led to the adoption of the genotype-first approach to characterize individuals at the etiological level.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"65-72"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/78/ce/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-65.PMC7365295.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189724","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/wgaebel
Wolfgang Gaebel, Johannes Stricker, Ariane Kerst
This article provides a brief overview of the changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 regarding the classification of mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders. These changes include a new chapter structure, new diagnostic categories, changes in diagnostic criteria, and steps towards dimensionality. Additionally, we review evaluative field studies of ICD-11, which provide preliminary evidence for higher reliability and clinical utility of ICD-11 compared with ICD-10. Despite the extensive revision process, changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 were relatively modest in that both systems are categorical, classifying mental phenomena based on self-reported or clinically observable symptoms. Other recent approaches to psychiatric nosology and classification (eg, neurobiology-based or hierarchical) are discussed. To meet the needs of different user groups, we propose expanding the stepwise approach to diagnosis introduced for some diagnostic categories in ICD-11, which includes categorical and dimensional elements. .
{"title":"Changes from ICD-10 to ICD-11 and future directions in psychiatric classification\u2029.","authors":"Wolfgang Gaebel, Johannes Stricker, Ariane Kerst","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/wgaebel","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/wgaebel","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This article provides a brief overview of the changes from <i>ICD-10</i> to <i>ICD-11</i> regarding the classification of mental, behavioral, or neurodevelopmental disorders. These changes include a new chapter structure, new diagnostic categories, changes in diagnostic criteria, and steps towards dimensionality. Additionally, we review evaluative field studies of <i>ICD-11</i>, which provide preliminary evidence for higher reliability and clinical utility of <i>ICD-11</i> compared with <i>ICD-10</i>. Despite the extensive revision process, changes from <i>ICD-10</i> to <i>ICD-11</i> were relatively modest in that both systems are categorical, classifying mental phenomena based on self-reported or clinically observable symptoms. Other recent approaches to psychiatric nosology and classification (eg, neurobiology-based or hierarchical) are discussed. To meet the needs of different user groups, we propose expanding the stepwise approach to diagnosis introduced for some diagnostic categories in <i>ICD-11</i>, which includes categorical and dimensional elements.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"7-15"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/87/9d/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-7.PMC7365296.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189720","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/eperkins
Emily R Perkins, Keanan J Joyner, Christopher J Patrick, Bruce D Bartholow, Robert D Latzman, Colin G DeYoung, Roman Kotov, Ulrich Reininghaus, Samuel E Cooper, Mohammad H Afzali, Anna R Docherty, Michael N Dretsch, Nicholas R Eaton, Vina M Goghari, John D Haltigan, Robert F Krueger, Elizabeth A Martin, Giorgia Michelini, Anthony C Ruocco, Jennifer L Tackett, Noah C Venables, Irwin D Waldman, David H Zald
The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is an empirical structural model of psychological symptoms formulated to improve the reliability and validity of clinical assessment. Neurobiology can inform assessments of early risk and intervention strategies, and the HiTOP model has greater potential to interface with neurobiological measures than traditional categorical diagnoses given its enhanced reliability. However, one complication is that observed biological correlates of clinical symptoms can reflect various factors, ranging from dispositional risk to consequences of psychopathology. In this paper, we argue that the HiTOP model provides an optimized framework for conducting research on the biological correlates of psychopathology from an ontogenetic perspective that distinguishes among indicators of liability, current symptoms, and consequences of illness. Through this approach, neurobiological research can contribute more effectively to identifying individuals at high dispositional risk, indexing treatment-related gains, and monitoring the consequences of mental illness, consistent with the aims of the HiTOP framework. .
{"title":"Neurobiology and the Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology: progress toward ontogenetically informed and clinically useful nosology\u2029.","authors":"Emily R Perkins, Keanan J Joyner, Christopher J Patrick, Bruce D Bartholow, Robert D Latzman, Colin G DeYoung, Roman Kotov, Ulrich Reininghaus, Samuel E Cooper, Mohammad H Afzali, Anna R Docherty, Michael N Dretsch, Nicholas R Eaton, Vina M Goghari, John D Haltigan, Robert F Krueger, Elizabeth A Martin, Giorgia Michelini, Anthony C Ruocco, Jennifer L Tackett, Noah C Venables, Irwin D Waldman, David H Zald","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/eperkins","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/eperkins","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The Hierarchical Taxonomy of Psychopathology (HiTOP) is an empirical structural model of psychological symptoms formulated to improve the reliability and validity of clinical assessment. Neurobiology can inform assessments of early risk and intervention strategies, and the HiTOP model has greater potential to interface with neurobiological measures than traditional categorical diagnoses given its enhanced reliability. However, one complication is that observed biological correlates of clinical symptoms can reflect various factors, ranging from dispositional risk to consequences of psychopathology. In this paper, we argue that the HiTOP model provides an optimized framework for conducting research on the biological correlates of psychopathology from an ontogenetic perspective that distinguishes among indicators of liability, current symptoms, and consequences of illness. Through this approach, neurobiological research can contribute more effectively to identifying individuals at high dispositional risk, indexing treatment-related gains, and monitoring the consequences of mental illness, consistent with the aims of the HiTOP framework.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"51-63"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/75/89/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-51.PMC7365294.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38189725","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2020-03-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/mdavidson
Michael Davidson, Cristian Gabos-Grecu
Development and regulatory approval of psychotropic drugs targets individuals with syndromes described in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). This helps drug developers and regulators to communicate with prescribers, and prescribers to match a specific psychotropic with the individual patient(s) most likely to benefit from it. However, this practice has been criticized on the grounds that DSM syndromes are too heterogenous biologically, and the effects of psychotropics are too nonspecific to allow for an effective match. This review considers the advantages and disadvantages of the current practice and the possible alternatives. It concludes that efforts should be made to explore psychotropic development transdiagnostically, free of the DSM boundaries. However, currently there exists no alternative diagnostic system that is clearly superior to the DSM in terms of communications between the stakeholders in drug development. .
{"title":"Do DSM classifications help or hinder\u2028drug development?\u2029.","authors":"Michael Davidson, Cristian Gabos-Grecu","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/mdavidson","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31887/DCNS.2020.22.1/mdavidson","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Development and regulatory approval of psychotropic drugs targets individuals with syndromes described in the current Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM). This helps drug developers and regulators to communicate with prescribers, and prescribers to match a specific psychotropic with the individual patient(s) most likely to benefit from it. However, this practice has been criticized on the grounds that DSM syndromes are too heterogenous biologically, and the effects of psychotropics are too nonspecific to allow for an effective match. This review considers the advantages and disadvantages of the current practice and the possible alternatives. It concludes that efforts should be made to explore psychotropic development transdiagnostically, free of the DSM boundaries. However, currently there exists no alternative diagnostic system that is clearly superior to the DSM in terms of communications between the stakeholders in drug development.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"22 1","pages":"73-79"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2020-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/cf/34/DialoguesClinNeurosci-22-73.PMC7365297.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"38190210","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2019-12-01DOI: 10.31887/DCNS.2019.21.4/enestler
Angélica Torres-Berrío, Orna Issler, Eric M Parise, Eric J Nestler
Depression is a devastating psychiatric disorder caused by a combination of genetic predisposition and life events, mainly exposure to stress. Early life stress (ELS) in particular is known to "scar" the brain, leading to an increased susceptibility to developing depression later in life via epigenetic mechanisms. Epigenetic processes lead to changes in gene expression that are not due to changes in DNA sequence, but achieved via modulation of chromatin modifications, DNA methylation, and noncoding RNAs. Here we review common epigenetic mechanisms including the enzymes that take part in reading, writing, and erasing specific epigenetic marks. We then describe recent developments in understanding how ELS leads to changes in the epigenome that are manifested in increased susceptibility to depression-like abnormalities in animal models. We conclude with highlighting the need for future studies that will potentially enable the utilisation of the understanding of epigenetic changes linked to ELS for the development of much-needed novel therapeutic strategies and biomarker discovery. .
抑郁症是一种毁灭性的精神疾病,由遗传易感性和生活事件(主要是面临的压力)共同造成。众所周知,早期生活压力(ELS)会给大脑留下 "疤痕",从而通过表观遗传机制增加日后患抑郁症的几率。表观遗传过程会导致基因表达的改变,而这些改变并不是由于 DNA 序列的改变,而是通过染色质修饰、DNA 甲基化和非编码 RNA 的调节实现的。在此,我们回顾了常见的表观遗传机制,包括参与读取、书写和清除特定表观遗传标记的酶。然后,我们将介绍在了解 ELS 如何导致表观基因组变化方面的最新进展,这些变化在动物模型中表现为抑郁症样异常的易感性增加。最后,我们强调了未来研究的必要性,这些研究将有可能利用对与 ELS 相关的表观遗传变化的了解来开发急需的新型治疗策略和发现生物标志物。.
{"title":"Unraveling the epigenetic landscape of depression: focus on early life stress\u2029.","authors":"Angélica Torres-Berrío, Orna Issler, Eric M Parise, Eric J Nestler","doi":"10.31887/DCNS.2019.21.4/enestler","DOIUrl":"10.31887/DCNS.2019.21.4/enestler","url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Depression is a devastating psychiatric disorder caused by a combination of genetic predisposition and life events, mainly exposure to stress. Early life stress (ELS) in particular is known to \"scar\" the brain, leading to an increased susceptibility to developing depression later in life via epigenetic mechanisms. Epigenetic processes lead to changes in gene expression that are not due to changes in DNA sequence, but achieved via modulation of chromatin modifications, DNA methylation, and noncoding RNAs. Here we review common epigenetic mechanisms including the enzymes that take part in reading, writing, and erasing specific epigenetic marks. We then describe recent developments in understanding how ELS leads to changes in the epigenome that are manifested in increased susceptibility to depression-like abnormalities in animal models. We conclude with highlighting the need for future studies that will potentially enable the utilisation of the understanding of epigenetic changes linked to ELS for the development of much-needed novel therapeutic strategies and biomarker discovery.\u2029.</p>","PeriodicalId":54343,"journal":{"name":"Dialogues in Clinical Neuroscience","volume":"21 4","pages":"341-357"},"PeriodicalIF":8.3,"publicationDate":"2019-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/68/e9/DialoguesClinNeurosci-21-341.PMC6952747.pdf","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"37553665","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}