This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non-commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

BackgroundTreatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) affects about one-third of individuals with schizophrenia. People with TRS do not experience sustained symptom relief and at the same time have the most severe disease-related disability and associated costs among individuals with severe mental disorders. Like caregivers of people with treatment-responsive schizophrenia, caregivers of individuals with TRS experience the disease burden along with their care recipients; however, for those providing care for individuals with TRS, the stress of the burden is unrelenting due to uncontrolled symptoms and a lack of effective treatment options. The objective of this study is to better understand the burden of TRS from the caregiver perspective and to explore their perception of available treatments.MethodsEight focus groups with non-professional, informal caregivers of individuals with TRS were conducted in 5 US locations. TRS was defined as failure of ≥2 antipsychotics and persistent moderate-to-severe positive symptoms of schizophrenia, per caregiver report.ResultsThe 27 caregivers reported an average of 37 h/week providing direct care, and 21 reported being on call “24/7.” Caregivers commonly reported that their care recipients exhibited symptoms of auditory hallucinations (89%), agitation/irritability/hostility (81%), suspiciousness (78%), tangentiality (74%), and cognitive impairment (74%); 70% of caregivers ranked suspiciousness/persecution as the most challenging symptom category. Caring for an individual with TRS impacted many caregivers’ finances, career prospects, social relationships, and sense of freedom. Additionally, multiple medication failures led to a sense of hopelessness for many caregivers.ConclusionsPersistent positive symptoms caused significant perceived burden, feelings of being overwhelmed and having no relief, and substantial negative impacts on caregivers’ emotional and physical health. To address these substantial unmet needs, policy makers should be aware of the need for practical, social, and emotional support for these caregivers and their families. Additionally, new treatment options for TRS should be developed.

Objective. To identify and explore concepts important to patients with cognitive symptoms of major depressive disorder (MDD) and adapt an existing patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess these symptoms.Methods. Four focus groups were conducted with MDD patients (n 5 33) to elicit relevant concepts and determine whether one of several PRO scales could be used to assess cognitive symptoms of depression. Following selection and minor modification of the Perceived Deficits Questionnaire (PDQ), cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted with additional patients (n 5 17) to further refine and adapt this measure for use in MDD. Minor revisions based on patient input yielded the PDQ for Depression (PDQ-D).Results. Focus group participants reported a variety of cognitive symptoms that were classified into 7 general categories: lack of focus and clear thought, memory problems, difficulty with lexical access, difficulty with divided attention, difficulty with decision making, difficulty thinking quickly, and difficulty learning new things. Limitations in work productivity were the most commonly reported impacts of cognitive symptoms. While suggesting a few modifications, focus group participants reacted positively to the PDQ based on the breadth, specificity, and relevance of the items. Cognitive debriefing participants indicated that the modified PDQ items were generally easy to understand and relevant to their experiences with MDD.Conclusion. Because cognitive symptoms are burdensome to patients with MDD, their assessment is important to optimize treatment outcomes. The PDQ-D has the potential to supplement existing assessment methods, providing unique information important for both comprehensive evaluation of individuals with MDD and evaluation of new treatments.

BackgroundMinimal/non-response to antipsychotic treatment, and persistent positive symptoms despite treatment, are common among patients with schizophrenia. The aim of this study was to characterize a US treatment-resistant schizophrenia (TRS) population in terms of patient demographics, burden of symptoms, treatment history, and factors influencing therapeutic choice.MethodsIn an online survey, 204 psychiatrists self-selected and completed three patient records: two TRS and one schizophrenia (‘non-TRS’).ResultsRespondents reported that 29.5% of their schizophrenia caseload had TRS. Selected TRS (n = 408) vs non-TRS (n = 204) patients were more likely to be unemployed (74.5% vs 45.1%, p < 0.001), hospitalized at least once (93.4% vs 74.0%, p < 0.001), and to have physical/psychiatric comorbidities including obesity (40.2% vs 23.5%, p < 0.001) and depression (38.7% vs 25.0%, p = 0.001). Psychiatric symptoms were more frequent and severe in TRS, and interfered more with social and functioning domains. Of positive symptoms, eliminating delusions and hallucinations was considered most important to improve a patient’s long-term prognosis. In TRS, clozapine monotherapy was the most common treatment (15.9%), though ranked fifth of ten options to treat TRS. Psychiatrists typically increased the antipsychotic dose or added a second antipsychotic before initiating clozapine or switching antipsychotics. Antipsychotic switches were most commonly due to lack of efficacy (TRS = 71.4% vs non-TRS = 54.3%, p < 0.001) and intolerability (34.4% vs 38.4%, p = 0.22) with the prior antipsychotic. Persistent hallucinatory behavior was the top symptom leading to treatment switches in TRS (63.9% vs 37.1%, p < 0.001).ConclusionsAccording to psychiatrists, symptoms have a greater clinical burden on patients with TRS than non-TRS. TRS is commonly managed by antipsychotic dose increases/combinations, with clozapine the fifth preference despite being the only approved TRS medication. New treatments are needed for patients who do not respond to available antipsychotics.

Objective: This post hoc analysis in patients medically diagnosed with chronic migraine (CM) and medication-overuse headache (MOH) evaluated reductions in the use of acute headache medication (AHM) and sustained changes in the diagnostic status of CM and MOH following eptinezumab treatment in the PROMISE-2 study.Background: Eptinezumab, a monoclonal antibody that inhibits calcitonin generelated peptide, is approved in the United States for the preventive treatment of migraine. A previous analysis showed that eptinezumab reduced monthly migraine days and was well tolerated in the subgroup of PROMISE-2 patients diagnosed with both CM and MOH. Methods:The phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled PROMISE-2 study (NCT02974153) randomized adults with CM to eptinezumab 100 mg, 300 mg, or placebo (administered intravenously every 12 weeks for up to two doses). MOH was prospectively diagnosed at screening by trained physicians based on 3 months of medication history and International Classification of Headache Disorders-3β criteria. This post hoc analysis evaluated changes in total and class-specific days of AHM usage, the percentage of patients using AHM at or above MOH diagnostic thresholds, and the percentage of patients experiencing monthly headache and migraine day frequency below diagnostic thresholds for MOH and/or CM. Results:In PROMISE-2, 431/1072 (40.2%) patients with CM were diagnosed with MOH (eptinezumab 100 mg, n = 139; 300 mg, n = 147; placebo, n = 145) and were