Objective: There is accumulating evidence that adjunctive treatment with N-acetylcysteine may be effective for schizophrenia. This study aimed to conduct a comprehensive meta-analysis examining the efficacy of randomised control trials investigating N-acetylcysteine as an adjunct treatment for schizophrenia and the first to investigate cognition as an outcome. Methods: We systematically reviewed Medline, EmCare, PsycINFO, Embase, CINAHL Complete, China Knowledge Resource Integrated Database and the Cochrane Clinical Trials online registry for randomised control trials of N-acetylcysteine for schizophrenia. We undertook pairwise meta-analyses of N-acetylcysteine vs placebo for psychosis symptoms and cognition. Results: Seven studies, including n = 220 receiving N-acetylcysteine and n = 220 receiving placebo, met inclusion criteria for the pairwise meta-analyses. Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale negative and total scores were significantly improved in the N-acetylcysteine group after 24 weeks of treatment. The cognitive domain of working memory improved with N-acetylcysteine supplementation. Conclusion: Evidence supports the notion that N-acetylcysteine may be a useful adjunct to standard treatment for the improvement of schizophrenia symptoms, as well as the cognitive domain of working memory. Treatment effects were observed at the later time point (⩾24 weeks), suggesting that longer interventions are required for the success of N-acetylcysteine treatment.

Bipolar disorder (BD) is commonly misdiagnosed as major depressive disorder (MDD). This is understandable, as depression often precedes mania and is otherwise indistinguishable in both. It is therefore imperative to identify neural mechanisms that can differentiate the two disorders. Interrogating resting brain neural activity may reveal core distinguishing abnormalities. We adopted an a priori approach, examining three key networks documented in previous mood disorder literature subserving executive function, salience and rumination that may differentiate euthymic BD and MDD patients. Thirty-eight patients with BD, 39 patients with MDD matched for depression severity, and 39 age-gender matched healthy controls, completed resting-state fMRI scans. Seed-based and data-driven Independent Component analyses (ICA) were implemented to examine group differences in resting-state connectivity (pFDR < 0.05). Seed analysis masks were target regions identified from the fronto-parietal (FPN), salience (SN) and default-mode (DMN) networks. Seed-based analyses identified significantly greater connectivity between the subgenual cingulate cortex (DMN) and right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (FPN) in BD relative to MDD and controls. The ICA analyses also found greater connectivity between the DMN and inferior frontal gyrus, an FPN region in BD relative to MDD. There were also significant group differences across the three networks in both clinical groups relative to controls. Altered DMN–FPN functional connectivity is thought to underlie deficits in the processing, management and regulation of affective stimuli. Our results suggest that connectivity between these networks could potentially distinguish the two disorders and could be a possible trait mechanism in BD persisting even in the absence of symptoms.

Available evidence suggests that individuals can enhance their ability to modulate brain activity in target regions, within the Emotion Regulation network, using fMRI-based neurofeedback. However, there is no systematic review that investigates the effectiveness of this method on amygdala modulation, a core region within this network. The major goal of this study was to systematically review and analyze the effects of real-time fMRI-Neurofeedback concerning the neuromodulation of the amygdala during Emotion Regulation training. A search was performed in PubMed, Science Direct, and Web of Science with the following key terms: ≪(“neurofeedback” or “neuro feedback” or “neuro-feedback”) and (“emotion regulation”) and (fMRI OR “functional magnetic resonance”),≫ and afterwards two additional searches were performed, replacing the term “emotion regulation” for “amygdala” and “neurofeedback” for “feedback.” Of the 531 identified articles, only 19 articles reported results of amygdala modulation during Emotional Regulation training through rtfMRI-NF, using healthy participants or patients, in original research articles. The results, systematically reviewed here, provide evidence for amygdala's modulation during rtfMRI-NF training, although studies' heterogeneity precluded a quantitative meta-analysis—the included studies relied on different outcome measures to infer the success of neurofeedback intervention. Thus, a qualitative analysis was done instead. We identified critical features influencing inference on the quality of the intervention as: the inclusion of a Practice Run, a Transfer Run and a Control Group in the protocol, and to choose adequate Emotion Regulation strategies—in particular, the effective recall of autobiographic memories. Surprisingly, the Regulated vs. Control Condition was lacking in most of the studies, precluding valid inference of amygdala neuromodulation within Session. The best controlled studies nevertheless showed positive effects. The type of stimulus/interface did not seem critical for amygdala modulation. We also identified potential effects of lateralization of amygdala responses following Up- or Down-Regulation, and the impact of fMRI parameters for data acquisition and analysis. Despite qualitative evidence for amygdala modulation during rtfMRI-NF, there are still important limitations in the design of a clear conceptual framework of NF-training research. Future studies should focus on more homogeneous guidelines concerning design, protocol structure and, particularly, harmonized outcome measures to provide quantitative estimates of neuromodulatory effects in the amygdala.