Excessive screen time among adolescents negatively impacts multiple aspects of sleep, which in turn increases the risk of depressive symptoms – particularly among girls. That is the conclusion of a new study published in the open-access journal PLOS Global Public Healthby Sebastian Hökby of Karolinska Institutet, Sweden, and colleagues.
Recently, the Swedish Public Health Agency published recommendations that adolescents use no more than two-to-three hours of daily leisure screen time, partly to promote better sleep. Previous studies have suggested associations between screen time, sleep disruptions, and depression in teens. However, sleep problems and depression often coincide, and the direction of these associations has been unclear.
In the new study, researchers tracked 4,810 Swedish students aged 12-16, collecting data on sleep quality and quantity, depressive symptoms, and screen usage at three timepoints over the course of a year.
The researchers found that increased screen time led to deteriorated sleep within three months, impacting both the duration and quality of sleep. Screen time was also found to postpone sleep times towards later hours – disrupting multiple aspects of the human sleep-wake cycle at once. Among boys, screen time had a direct adverse effect on depression after twelve months, while among girls the depressive effect was mediated through sleep disturbances. Sleep could explain about half (38%-57%) of the association between screen time and depression in girls. Boys who spent more time on screens also experienced sleep disruptions, but these were not strongly associated to later depression.
The authors summarize: “In this study, we found that adolescents who reported longer screen times also developed poorer sleep habits over time. In turn, this led to increased depression levels, especially among girls.”
They add: “Our results do suggest that less[…] screen time seems healthier, in line with previous World Health Organization statements…if screen times were somehow reduced, for example through public health policies, our results imply that the high burden of depressive states among young Swedish women, and maybe young men, would likely decrease.”
Photoreceptor cells in the retina. Credit: Scientific Animations
Could the eyes, which are directly connected to the brain, hold clues to brain changes? An international team of researchers led by the University of Zurich and the University Hospital of Psychiatry Zurich has now tackled this very question. In their study, published in Nature Mental Health, the researchers examined whether changes in our nerve connections are linked to a genetic risk for schizophrenia, as impaired neural information processing is one of the main characteristics of the disorder.
Previous studies suggest that schizophrenia not only reduces volume of grey matter in the brains of those affected, but that it also leads to loss of retinal tissue. But whether these changes are the cause of schizophrenia or a consequence of the disorder has remained unanswered. Retinal health could also be affected by schizophrenia itself, for example, through antipsychotic medication, lifestyle factors or diabetes.
Extensive use of data from healthy individuals
“To investigate whether the risk of developing schizophrenia has an effect on the central nervous system, we examined tens of thousands of healthy individuals,” says Finn Rabe, first author of the study and postdoc at the University of Zurich. “We then calculated polygenic risk scores for each individual.”
The researchers were able to use extensive genetic and retinal data taken from the UK Biobank, a large biomedical database containing data from over half a million people. “You could say that the scale of the UK Biobank’s data has revolutionised biomedical research,” the researcher adds.
Thin retina, elevated risk
The study shows that higher genetic susceptibility to schizophrenia is indeed associated with thinner retinas. The effects are small, though, and can only be reliably demonstrated in large-scale studies. One of the study’s findings is that, unlike changes in the brain, changes in the retina are easy to detect using non-invasive and inexpensive retinal measurements. Thanks to optical coherence tomography, which can be described as a kind of ultrasound for the eye, retinal thickness can be measured in minutes.
This offers a promising outlook for prevention. “Our study shows the potential of using optical coherence tomography in clinical practice. But large-scale longitudinal studies are needed to examine how useful it will be for prevention,” says Finn Rabe.
Perspectives for new therapies
Another key finding of the study concerns genetic variants associated with inflammatory processes in the brain. These may also contribute to structural changes in the retina. The study thus offers further support for the inflammation hypothesis of schizophrenia, ie, the idea that inflammatory processes contribute to the development or progression of the disorder. “If this hypothesis is confirmed, inflammation could be interrupted by medication, potentially enabling us to improve treatment possibilities in the future,” says Rabe.
A prescription of gardening an allotment in the UK has shown promise as a means of improving health and well-being outside of conventional medical treatments.
Green social prescribing is a practice whereby a healthcare professional refers a patient to community-based nature activities to help improve health and well-being beyond medical treatments. Currently these programmes are in a testing phase, but evidence is now pointing to the need for investment in this area to make it an additional option for patients across the country.
More than 220 participants were included in the programme, and their mental health status was evaluated before and after exposure to an organised programme of nature-based activities, such as horticultural and care farming, sport and exercise, and outdoor mindfulness and craft-based activities.
The majority of participants took part in the programme weekly between one and four weeks, five to eight weeks, and others between nine and 12 weeks. The team used the Office of National Statistics measures of personal well-being, as well as the hospital anxiety and depression scale (HADS) to understand if participants had made improvements.
Horticulture
Across the board, participants reported improvements in well-being and mental health. But participants in longer programmes – typically nine to 12 weeks – or took part in activities related to horticulture and care farming, showed greater improvements in mood and anxiety levels compared with those involved in shorter programmes – one to four weeks – or in activities such as outdoor crafts, creative and mindfulness-based sessions, or sport and exercise.
The signs of improvement were similar to those seen in short-term cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), where someone might meet one-to-one with a therapist over a period ranging from six weeks to a year or more.
Professor Peter Coventry, Director of the University’s Mental Health and Addiction Research Group, said: “We have known for some time that nature has a positive impact on health and wellbeing, but in more recent years, a stronger evidence-base has grown that proves this to be true for mental health in particular.
“The fact that activities such as gardening, tending allotments, and care farming had the most impact on the participants in our study, demonstrated that it is not just about being passive in nature, but connecting with it in a meaningful way.
“There is also something to be said for connecting with nature in the company of other people who live in the same place as you. Anxiety and depression can often be born out of loneliness and feelings of disconnectedness, so it makes sense that taking part in shared activities close to home – especially those that involve caring for and improving your local environment – can help lift mood and reduce anxiety.”
All ages
The study showed that these positive impacts were seen in all ages, which ranged from age 18 to age 85, and across genders. Researchers are now calling for more investment to be made to support these community activities and the employment of green social prescribers that GPs and other health and social care professionals can refer their patients to.
Trish Darcy, research associate from the University’s Mental Health and Addiction Research Group, said: “This intervention might not work for everyone, but through an initial exploratory conversation a social prescriber will discuss with a patient or user of the service if nature-based activities would be suited to them, and for that choice to happen we need more investment to support these community-based activities”.
“In our study 65% of participants were from low socioeconomic groups and we now know that not only can it help improve their mental health, but participation was high for horticultural based activities in particular, meaning that not only is it good for the individual, but for the local community environment too.”
Test and learn
The evaluation, published in the journal Health & Social Care in the Community, was conducted in partnership with The HEY Smile Foundation and NHS Humber and North Yorkshire Integrated Care Board (ICB).
Dr Hannah Armitt a Clinical Psychologist and Clinical Lead for the Humber and North Yorkshire ‘test and learn’ programme said: “The research conducted in our region has the potential to enhance service delivery by connecting statutory services with local providers of nature based and outdoors activities.
“It is important to evidence the potential of green space and nature to ensure clinicians and patients alike can harness the benefits of this wonderful free natural resource we have in abundance in Yorkshire and Humber.”
Positive outcomes
Anthony Hurd, Humber and North Yorkshire Green Social Prescribing Programme Manager, said “This work has not only shown the positive outcomes that nature-based activities have on mental health, it has also highlighted the role that community-based organisations play in supporting the health and wellbeing of communities.
“As healthcare begins to move more into the community, and with a focus on prevention, the community-based organisations delivering activities such as gardening, care farming and walking groups need to be recognised as key players in our national health service and be resourced appropriately.”
An Edith Cowan University (ECU) study has found children born to mothers who experienced gestational diabetes (GDM) during pregnancy are more likely to develop attention-deficient hyperactive disorder (ADHD) and externalising behaviour. The study appears in BMC Paediatrics.
The study used data from 200 000 mother-child pairs across Europe and Australia, and found that in children aged 7 to 10, those born to mothers with gestational diabetes had consistently higher ADHD symptoms.
Children aged 4 to 6 years, born to mothers with gestational diabetes consistently exhibited more externalising problems than those born who didn’t.
“Externalising symptoms are behaviours directed outward. Instead of experiencing depression or anxiety, these children often display hyperactivity, impulsivity, defiance, or aggression,” explained first author Dr Rachelle Pretorius, ECU Honorary researcher.
“Externalising problems frequently coexist with ADHD symptoms and tend to emerge before medical intervention, especially during the early school years,” she added.
“At younger ages, children may exhibit more externalising problems and as the child matures, symptoms or behaviour related to ADHD may become more apparent. ADHD does not have biological markers for diagnosis, making ADHD a disorder that is difficult to detect before symptoms manifest,” said senior author Professor Rae-Chi Huang.
It is still unclear why children exposed to gestational diabetes retained more externalising problems and ADHD symptoms respectively after adjustments.
“However, our findings suggest that these externalising behaviours may decrease over time but could extend into other domains such as neurodevelopment outcomes such as ADHD symptoms.”
Dr Pretorius noted that while the exact mechanics of gestational diabetes influence on child development is still unclear, it is believed that acute and chronic maternal inflammation during pregnancy may influence certain pathways in a child’s brain programming in-utero and contribute to neurodevelopment, cognitive and behaviour outcomes later in life.
“Several studies suggest that the severity of maternal diabetes, associated with maternal obesity, chronic inflammation have a joint impact on the development of autism spectrum disorder and ADHD in children, which is greater than the impact of either condition alone.”
A new study led by the University of Southampton has found that medications for ADHD have overall small effects on blood pressure and heart rate after weeks or a few months of use.
There have been concerns about the side effects of ADHD medications but the new findings, coupled with other studies, suggest that the benefits of taking these medications outweigh the risks, while highlighting the need for careful monitoring.
The study, published in The Lancet Psychiatry, conducted the largest and most comprehensive analysis of the cardiovascular effects of ADHD medications based on the results of randomised controlled trials – the most rigorous type of clinical study to assess medication effects.
Professor Samuele Cortese, senior lead author of the study from the University of Southampton said: “When it comes to taking any medication, risks and benefits should always be assessed together. We found an overall small increase in blood pressure and pulse for the majority of children taking ADHD medications.
“Other studies show clear benefits in terms of reductions in mortality risk and improvement in academic functions, as well as a small increased risk of hypertension, but not other cardiovascular diseases. Overall, the risk-benefit ratio is reassuring for people taking ADHD medications.”
The study was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR), within the framework of the NIHR Research Professorships scheme to Professor Samuele Cortese, with Dr Luis Farhat (University of São Paulo, Brazil) as first author and Professor Alexis Revet (University of Toulouse, France) as co-senior author.
It is estimated that attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) affects around 4 per cent of children in the UK. Of these, around 45 per cent are treated with medication.
The international team of investigators analysed data from 102 randomized controlled trials, including a total of 22,702 participants with ADHD. They used an advanced statistical approach – network meta-analysis – that allowed them to compare the effects of several medications, even when the medications were not directly compared in the trials included in the analysis.
They found that all ADHD medications were generally associated with overall small effects on blood pressure, heart rate, and ECG parameters. With the exception of guanfacine (which leads to decreased blood pressure and heart rate), other medications led to increases in the values of these parameters.
No significant differences were found between stimulants (including methylphenidate and amphetamine) and non-stimulants (atomoxetine and viloxazine) with regard to their effects on blood pressure and heart rate.
“Our findings should inform future clinical guidelines, stressing the need to systematically monitor blood pressure and heart rate, both for stimulants and non-stimulants. This should be particularly relevant for practitioners who might assume that only stimulants have a negative effect on the cardiovascular system,” said Dr Farhat.
The researchers say that those with existing heart conditions should discuss the side effects of ADHD medications with a specialist cardiologist before starting treatment.
Professor Revet added: “Our findings, based on randomised controlled trials that tend to be of short duration due to ethical issues, should be complemented by results from real-world, longer-term studies.”
The research team will now look to see if some groups might be more vulnerable to cardiovascular side effects than others.
NIHR Research Professor Cortese concluded: “While our findings are informative at the group level, that is, on average, we cannot exclude that a subgroup of individuals may have a higher risk of more substantial cardiovascular alterations.
“While it is currently not possible to identify those individuals at higher risk, efforts based on precision medicine approaches will hopefully provide important insights in the future.”
Emerging evidence suggests that lycopene—a natural plant extract—may have antidepressant properties. New research in Food Science & Nutrition reveals the mechanisms behind its antidepressant effects.
Lycopene is a carotenoid, related to beta-carotene and gives some vegetables and fruits (eg, tomatoes, grapefruit) a red colour. Lycopene is a powerful antioxidant that might help protect cells from damage.
In mice with depressive-like behaviours, brain analyses revealed impairments in the hippocampus. Lycopene treatment lessened these impairments and reversed the animals’ depressive-like traits.
Lycopene treatment boosted the expression of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), a protein with roles in many aspects of brain function. Experiments indicated that a signalling pathway involving BDNF (called the BDNF-TrkB pathway, which helps regulate learning, memory, and communication between neurons) is inhibited in mice with depression, and that lycopene treatment alleviates this inhibition.
The study “offers an effective avenue for the development of novel antidepressant therapies,” the authors wrote. “We plan to conduct further verification in future studies and include multiple brain regions in our research.”
Post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is common in military veterans but can affect anyone who has suffered or witnessed an extreme physical or emotional event, and it is very hard to treat. More than two-thirds of people fail to respond to treatment with drugs and therapy. Novel treatments are urgently needed.
A recent study from Israel has been showing promise with an unusual treatment: hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT). This involves breathing pure oxygen in a pressurised chamber. HBOT is conventionally used to treat various physical ailments, such as carbon monoxide poisoning and decompression sickness (also known as “the bends”).
The study, published in The Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, included 63 male veterans aged 25 to 60 who had suffered from PTSD for more than five years. Fifty-six subjects completed the study.
Participants in the study were randomly assigned (28 in each group) to either receive the active treatment with 60 sessions of hyperbaric oxygen at a pressure corresponding to diving 10 metres underwater, or a “sham treatment” (the control group), with air just above atmospheric pressure.
Treatments were 90 minutes a day, five days a week for 12 weeks and included air breaks, or simulated air breaks for people in the control group, every 20 minutes. The groups were similar (as expected in a randomised study) and could not correctly guess which treatment they received (this “blinding” helps remove bias from the study).
The group that received hyperbaric oxygen improved much more in self-reported symptoms related to PTSD and depression compared with the control group, immediately after the treatment and three months later.
Interestingly, changes could also be seen in certain areas of the brain associated with PTSD, with magnetic resonance imaging. The study reported some mild side-effects including resurfacing of traumatic memories, which in itself is very interesting and possibly part of the treatment effect.
The study is small but solid, with very interesting results.
More than half a century
Hyperbaric oxygen treatment has been used for more than half a century for its multiple effects on the immune system – in wound healing, infections and chronic inflammation. If we consider PTSD a wound with chronic inflammation, it is not difficult to imagine how it works, even if we do not fully understand the mechanisms involved.
In a wound, the damaged cells release molecules that trigger the immune system and attract stem cells involved in the healing process. This process uses lots of oxygen and the mitochondria that are the power plants of the cell need to work at full capacity.
If the healing is not completed, some cells close to the wound change their behaviour and close down power plants (mitochondria) to survive, instead of choosing to die and be replaced.
This is a natural survival mechanism, important for regeneration after an injury. Cells that are damaged but not lost go into survival mode that can be reversed when the imminent danger is over. But, for unknown reasons, some cells stay in survival mode.
This survival mode is called senescence or ageing. It happens normally as we age but with an injury, many cells can go into survival mode at the same time.
If we look at the body as an ecosystem or society, survival-mode cells are the elderly. The elderly cells are in a way smarter since they carry memories from previous traumas and do not work themselves to death when things get a bit rough. Unfortunately, they are also more sensitive to stress, are not as efficient, and still consume oxygen and energy.
The main reason for functional decline is that we gradually “rust” from the inside due to oxidative stress. We lose anti-oxidative capacity and get an increased number of elderly cells. The elderly cells have fewer mitochondria.
Many effective drugs are developed to reduce the symptoms of oxidative stress. However, since cells are programmed to preserve energy, the normal function may decline further if cells are not challenged. On the other hand, if we cannot reduce oxidative stress naturally, it may reduce our quality of life and lifespan.
Nerve cells in the brain live much longer than any other cell in the body. A brain cell can live 70 years or more. Regions of the brain called the amygdala, hippocampus and prefrontal cortex are important areas that are sensitive to oxidative stress and become dysfunctional in PTSD.
The immune cells patrol the body and their communication with the brain is important in PTSD. In the brain, astrocytes are immune cells with a long lifespan and memory that support and protect the brain cells.
In survival mode, due to mitochondrial dysfunction, this support becomes dysfunctional. It helps the brain cells to survive but is not good for optimal performance and causes chronic inflammation.
Astrocytes form a protective shield of antioxidants for elderly brain cells, which is difficult to overcome under normal circumstances. Hyperbaric oxygen has been shown to stimulate astrocytes to deliver new mitochondria to neurons in a cell model.
By challenging cells with hyperbaric oxygen, they gain enough energy for elderly cells to close down and die, and healthy cells become stronger and more efficient, which leaves room and energy for the next-generation workers (new stem cells). This reconditioning process may be what is at work in healing people with PTSD.
About 75% of a sample of nearly 20 000 people who have taken selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) report they found them helpful, according to new research from the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN) at King’s College London.
Published in Psychological Medicine, the study explored different factors that could explain why SSRIs work for some people with major depressive disorder, but not others.
Researchers analysed data from UK Biobank on 19 516 participants who had tried at least one SSRI, such as citalopram, fluoxetine, paroxetine or sertraline, for at least two weeks. Participants reported whether the SSRI helped them “feel better” using a single item questionnaire with possible responses “yes, at least a little”, “no”, “do not know”, or “prefer not to answer”. This is the first detailed analysis of this large-scale study which assesses SSRIs using self-reported experiences rather than clinician-reported remission from symptoms.
Overall, 74.9% felt SSRIs helped them feel better. 18.8% said the prescribed drug was not helpful.
Using a range of data collected by UK Biobank, the study analysed what factors might influence whether people found SSRIs helpful.
It found that sociodemographic factors such as age, gender and household income were linked to differences in how people perceived the effectiveness of SSRIs. Those participants who were older, male, had lower incomes, and reported alcohol or illicit drug use were more likely to say that they did not find antidepressants helpful.
Participants who had experienced no mood improvement even when positive events occurred or whose worst episode of depression lasted more than two years, were also less likely to report that SSRIs were helpful. Lastly those who had a greater genetic risk for depression, calculated using polygenic risk scores, were less likely to report that SSRIs were helpful.
The use of antidepressants, and the rate at which they are prescribed in the UK, has been the source of much debate both in the public and media. While antidepressants don’t work for every user, this research provides reassuring evidence that many people report that this common type of medication is helping them manage what can be a severe illness.
Dr Michelle Kamp, Postdoctoral Research Associate at King’s IoPPN and first author on the study
We know that not all people respond to antidepressants prescribed, but most studies have focussed on clinician’s perspectives of response. Using participant reports, we found a strong support for antidepressants, with three quarters of people saying the drugs had helped them. The factors that make people more likely to respond to antidepressants mirror findings in clinical trials which use measures reported by clinicians. This suggests that patient-focussed responses can capture valuable insights into the effectiveness of antidepressants.
Professor Cathryn Lewis, Professor of Genetic Epidemiology & Statistics at King’s IoPPN and senior author on the study
Professor Andrew McIntosh, Professor of Biological Psychiatry at the University of Edinburgh’s Centre for Clinical Brain Sciences and co-investigator on the study, said: “The findings from this large study show that nearly three-quarters of people in UK Biobank who were treated with antidepressants found them helpful. There is already excellent evidence from clinical trials that antidepressants work for people with depression. However those studies focus on addressing only whether they are more effective than placebos, and not why they are more effective in some people than others. We must now focus on developing a better understanding of how antidepressants work and how we can predict which people are most likely to benefit from these treatments.”
The study offers key insights into antidepressant response, however the sample may not fully represent the general population and reliance on retrospective self-reports can lead to inaccurate recollection.
People with autism are typically diagnosed by clinical observation and assessment. To deconstruct the clinical decision process, which is often subjective and difficult to describe, researchers used a large language model (LLM) to synthesize the behaviours and observations that are most indicative of an autism diagnosis. Their results, publishing in the Cell Press journal Cell, show that repetitive behaviours, special interests, and perception-based behaviours are most associated with an autism diagnosis.
These findings have potential to improve diagnostic guidelines for autism by decreasing the focus on social factors – which the established guidelines in the DSM-5 focus on but the model did not classify among the most relevant in diagnosing autism.
“Our goal was not to suggest that we could replace clinicians with AI tools for diagnosis,” says senior author Danilo Bzdok of the Mila Québec Artificial Intelligence Institute and McGill University in Montreal. “Rather, we sought to quantitatively define exactly what aspects of observed behaviour or patient history a clinician uses to reach a final diagnostic determination. In doing so, we hope to empower clinicians to work with diagnostic instruments that are more in line with their empirical realities.”
The scientists leveraged a transformer language model, which was pre-trained on about 489 million unique sentences. They then fine-tuned the LLM to predict the diagnostic outcome from a collection of more than 4000 reports written by clinicians working with patients considered for autism diagnosis. The reports, which were often used by multiple clinicians, included accounts of observed behaviour and relevant patient history but did not include a suggested diagnostic outcome.
The team developed a bespoke LLM module that pinpointed specific sentences in the reports that were most relevant to a correct diagnosis prediction. They then extracted the numerical representation of these highly autism-relevant sentences and compared them directly with the established diagnostic criteria enumerated in the DSM-5.
“Modern LLMs, with their advanced natural language processing capabilities, are natively suited to this textual analysis,” Bzdok says. “The key challenge we faced was in designing sentence-level interpretability tools to pinpoint the exact sentences, expressed by the healthcare professional themselves, that were most essential to a correct diagnosis prediction by the LLM.”
The researchers were surprised by how clearly the LLM was able to distinguish between the most diagnostically relevant criteria. For example, their framework flagged that repetitive behaviours, special interests, and perception-based behaviour were the criteria most relevant to autism. While these criteria are used in clinical settings, current criteria focus more on deficits in social interplay and lack of communication skills.
The authors note that there are limitations to this study, including a lack of geographical diversity. Additionally, the researchers did not analyse their results based on demographic variables, with the goal of making the conclusions more broadly applicable.
The team expects their framework will be helpful to researchers and medical professionals working with a range of psychiatric, mental health, and neurodevelopmental disorders in which clinical judgement forms the bulk of the diagnostic decision-making process.
“We expect this paper to be highly relevant to the broader autism community,” Bzdok says. “We hope that our paper motivates conversations about grounding diagnostic standards in more empirically derived criteria. We also hope it will establish common threads that link seemingly diverse clinical presentations of autism together.”
A new study, recently published in the journal Scientific Reports, has analysed and compared the fatty acids in the blood of individuals with schizophrenia, of those with cannabis use disorder and of those with both diagnoses, with the aim of shedding light on new biomarkers and improving the understanding of the biological relationship between the two disorders. The study also offers a powerful tool for identifying new biomarkers.
Cannabis is one of the most widely used substances in the world, with some 228 million users between the ages of 15 and 64. The risk of developing schizophrenia increases significantly with cannabis use, especially when it starts at a young age. What is more, it is estimated that approximately 10% of cannabis users will develop cannabis use disorder during their lifetime. Curiously, almost a third of individuals diagnosed with schizophrenia also meet the criteria for cannabis use disorder; and cannabis use disorder affects up to 42% of people with schizophrenia.
In this bid to shed light on the biological mechanisms that determine why some individuals develop schizophrenia while others only experience cannabis use disorder, despite similar levels of exposure to cannabis, the UPV/EHU’s Neuropsychopharmacology group has managed to detect “potential biomarkers in the blood that could help predict the risk some people have of developing a psychiatric disorder such as schizophrenia if they use cannabis”, explained Leyre Urigüen, coordinator of the study.
So, the research group compared the fatty acid content in the blood of samples taken from “a group of individuals with schizophrenia who did not use cannabis, a group who used cannabis and have developed a cannabis use disorder, a group with a dual pathology of schizophrenia with cannabis abuse, and a control group of individuals with neither a psychiatric disorder nor drug use”, explained Dr Urigüen. In the study they wanted to shed light on what happens “with people who use cannabis and develop schizophrenia; how do they differ from those who use cannabis and never develop a psychiatric disorder?” she added.
“We found considerable differences between these groups of individuals. By comparing the quantities of certain metabolites (fatty acids), we were able to perfectly differentiate between the three patient populations,” stressed the UPV/EHU researcher. “This indicates that there is an altered or different metabolism between these three groups.” In this study the Neuropsychopharmacology research group at the UPV/EHU detected “that some fatty acids differentiate between the cannabis-using group and the groups with schizophrenia and dual-diagnosis patients. These molecules could potentially be biomarkers”, said Urigüen.
Paving the way forward
The researcher is very hopeful about this finding: “I think it is important to be capable of finding blood biomarkers that can help predict the risk of developing a psychiatric disorder, such as schizophrenia due to cannabis use, and this study has proven to be the start of this way forward. Now this has to be disproved by studies with a larger cohort of people than the one we have analysed.”
In this respect, the researcher stressed that another of the strengths of the study is “the fine-tuning of plasma lipidomics in patients; in other words, the complete study of fatty acids (lipids). We are proposing a way of working that can be replicated by other groups, and that way, headway can be made in the specification of these metabolites”. This approach has been developed by the IBeA research group under the direction of the UPV/EHU professor Nestor Etxebarria. Both groups are working side by side on “various approaches to the study in which they are trying to find answers to these and many other questions”.
