Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-29T11:11:11.009Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Examining the psychobiological response to acute social stress across clinical stages and symptom trajectories in the early psychosis continuum

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 February 2023

Jai L. Shah*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Vincent Paquin
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Sarah V. McIlwaine
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Occupational Health, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Ashok K. Malla
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Ridha Joober
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
Marita Pruessner
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry, McGill University, Montreal, Canada
*
Corresponding author: Jai L. Shah, email: [email protected]
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The stress-vulnerability model has been repeatedly highlighted in relation to the risk, onset and course of psychosis, and has been independently studied in clinical high-risk (CHR) and first-episode psychosis (FEP) populations. Notable in this literature, however, is that there are few studies directly comparing markers of stress response across progressive stages of illness. Here we examined the psychobiological response to the Trier Social Stress Test in 28 CHR (mean age 19.1) and 61 FEP (age 23.0) patients, in order to understand the stage(s) or trajectories in which differences in subjective stress or physiological response occur. The overall clinical sample had greater perceived stress and blunted cortisol (FEP + CHR, n = 89, age 21.7) compared with healthy controls (n = 45, age 22.9). Additional analyses demonstrated elevated heart rate and systolic blood pressure in FEP compared with CHR, but there were no further differences in physiological parameters (cortisol, heart rate, or blood pressure) between stage- or trajectory-based groups. Together, this suggests that individual stress response markers may differentially emerge at particular stages en route to psychosis – and demonstrates how stage-based analyses can shed light on the emergence and evolution of neurobiological changes in mental illness.

Type
Regular Article
Creative Commons
Creative Common License - CCCreative Common License - BY
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited.
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Introduction

The interaction between stress and vulnerability has long been identified as a potential contributor to the development of psychotic illness (C. Corcoran et al., Reference Corcoran, Walker, Huot, Mittal, Tessner, Kestler and Malaspina2003; Gispen-de Wied, Reference Gispen-de Wied2000; Zubin & Spring, Reference Zubin and Spring1977). Evidence for this diathesis has accumulated from a range of approaches (Paquin, Lapierre, et al., Reference Paquin, Lapierre, Veru and King2021), including general epidemiology and prospective cohort studies (Arseneault et al., Reference Arseneault, Cannon, Fisher, Polanczyk, Moffitt and Caspi2011; Cullen et al., Reference Cullen, Fisher, Gullet, Fraser, Roberts, Zahid, To, Yap, Zunszain, Pariante, Wood, McGuire, Murray, Mondelli and Laurens2022; J. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Eack, Montrose, Tandon, Miewald, Prasad and Keshavan2012), adverse childhood experiences (Cullen et al., Reference Cullen, Fisher, Roberts, Pariante and Laurens2014; Varese et al., Reference Varese, Smeets, Drukker, Lieverse, Lataster, Viechtbauer, Read, van Os and Bentall2012), clinical assessments documenting sensitivity to stress (Devylder et al., Reference Devylder, Ben-David, Schobel, Kimhy, Malaspina and Corcoran2013; Myin-Germeys & van Os, Reference Myin-Germeys and van Os2007), analyses of perceived (subjective) stress in patients (Millman et al., Reference Millman, Pitts, Thompson, Kline, Demro, Weintraub, DeVylder, Mittal, Reeves and Schiffman2018; M. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Iyer, Faridi, Joober and Malla2011), and studies of dopamine or the hypothalamic–pituitary–adrenal axis (HPA) dysregulation (C. M. Corcoran et al., Reference Corcoran, Smith, McLaughlin, Auther, Malaspina and Cornblatt2012; Cullen et al., Reference Cullen, Addington, Bearden, Stone, Seidman, Cadenhead, Cannon, Cornblatt, Mathalon, McGlashan, Perkins, Tsuang, Woods and Walker2020; Mizrahi et al., Reference Mizrahi, Addington, Rusjan, Suridjan, Ng, Boileau, Pruessner, Remington, Houle and Wilson2012). In this way, it is believed that exposure to early-life adversity and stress can interface with innate and acquired neurobiological factors to contribute to distress and, ultimately, psychotic syndromes (M. Pruessner, Cullen, et al., Reference Pruessner, Cullen, Aas and Walker2017; E. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Mittal and Tessner2008).

Stress is a multidimensional phenomenon that includes both objective and subjective components (L. J. Phillips et al., Reference Phillips, Francey, Edwards and McMurray2007). Patients with psychosis report high levels of subjective stress and emotional reactivity in response to life events, which are then both intrusive and challenging to cope with (Horan et al., Reference Horan, Ventura, Nuechterlein, Subotnik, Hwang and Mintz2005, Reference Horan, Brown and Blanchard2007; Marks et al., Reference Marks, Steel and Peters2012; Mondelli et al., Reference Mondelli, Dazzan, Hepgul, Di Forti, Aas, D'Albenzio, Di Nicola, Fisher, Handley, Marques, Morgan, Navari, Taylor, Papadopoulos, Aitchison, Murray and Pariante2010; Palmier-Claus et al., Reference Palmier-Claus, Dunn and Lewis2012; L. J. Phillips et al., Reference Phillips, Edwards, McMurray and Francey2012; M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013; M. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Iyer, Faridi, Joober and Malla2011). There is likely to be a bidirectional relationship between symptoms and perceived stress (Renwick et al., Reference Renwick, Jackson, Turner, Sutton, Foley, McWilliams, Kinsella and O'Callaghan2009), while difficulty tolerating stress in early psychosis has been associated with a range of clinical (positive and negative psychotic symptoms, depression, and anxiety) outcomes and functional impairment (Belvederi Murri et al., Reference Belvederi Murri, Pariante, Dazzan, Hepgul, Papadopoulos, Zunszain, Di Forti, Murray and Mondelli2012; Devylder et al., Reference Devylder, Ben-David, Schobel, Kimhy, Malaspina and Corcoran2013).

The experience of stress – whether psychosocial, biological, or both in nature – then implicates neurobiology via a range of pathways including the HPA axis. Dynamic changes in the structural and functional features of the HPA axis occur in response to adaptive or pathologic forces, both internal and external (Myin-Germeys & van Os, Reference Myin-Germeys and van Os2007). For example, as children enter adolescence the frequency and significance of stressful life events increases (M. Gunnar & Quevedo, Reference Gunnar and Quevedo2007; M. R. Gunnar & Talge, Reference Gunnar, Talge and Schmidt2008). Such events are associated with HPA alterations such as elevated basal cortisol and a more robust acute response to stress (Lupien et al., Reference Lupien, McEwen, Gunnar and Heim2009; E. F. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Trotman, Pearce, Addington, Cadenhead, Cornblatt, Heinssen, Mathalon, Perkins, Seidman, Tsuang, Cannon, McGlashan and Woods2013), which typically peaks (in cortisol) approximately 20 min after the exposure itself (Kudielka et al., Reference Kudielka, Schommer, Hellhammer and Kirschbaum2004). Together, this suggests that adolescence is a period of sensitization during which the long-term set-point of HPA activity can be altered or dysregulated (E. F. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Sabuwalla and Huot2004). Factors known to influence the HPA axis include sex, diet, sleep, exercise, and medications (including antipsychotics) as well as substances (Mann et al., Reference Mann, Rossbach, Müller, Müller-Siecheneder, Pott, Linde, Dittmann and Hiemke2006; Steiner & Wotjak, Reference Steiner and Wotjak2008; E. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Mittal and Tessner2008). HPA axis dysregulation has been seen in a range of conditions beyond psychosis, including both mental and physical disorders (Mück-Seler et al., Reference Mück-Seler, Pivac, Jakovljević and Brzović1999; Phassouliotis et al., Reference Phassouliotis, Garner, Phillips, Bendall, Yun, Markulev, Kerr and McGorry2013; L. J. Phillips et al., Reference Phillips, McGorry, Garner, Thompson, Pantelis, Wood and Berger2006; Yeap & Thakore, Reference Yeap and Thakore2005).

A readily accessible (and therefore easily collected) measure of the HPA axis is that of salivary cortisol. A recent meta-analysis found substantial heterogeneity and no overall evidence for alterations of unstimulated salivary cortisol in early psychosis (Misiak et al., Reference Misiak, Pruessner, Samochowiec, Wiśniewski, Reginia and Stańczykiewicz2021), but others have highlighted the complementary importance of laboratory-based stress-response paradigms (Dickerson & Kemeny, Reference Dickerson and Kemeny2004; Jones & Fernyhough, Reference Jones and Fernyhough2006): although only a proxy for psychosocial stress in the flow of daily life, these tasks allow for experimental standardization of stressful scenarios across affected and control groups. The cortisol response to one such task – the Trier Social Stress Test (TSST) (Allen et al., Reference Allen, Kennedy, Dockray, Cryan, Dinan and Clarke2017; Kirschbaum et al., Reference Kirschbaum, Pirke and Hellhammer1993) – is consistently blunted during chronic stages of schizophrenia (Brenner et al., Reference Brenner, Liu, Laplante, Lupien, Pruessner, Ciampi, Joober and King2009; Ciufolini et al., Reference Ciufolini, Dazzan, Kempton, Pariante and Mondelli2014; Dauvermann & Donohoe, Reference Dauvermann and Donohoe2019; Jansen et al., Reference Jansen, Gispen-de Wied, Gademan, De Jonge, van der Linden and Kahn1998; Lange et al., Reference Lange, Deutschenbaur, Borgwardt, Lang, Walter and Huber2017; Zorn et al., Reference Zorn, Schür, Boks, Kahn, Joëls and Vinkers2017). Two studies have reported varying forms of cortisol blunting at the point of a FEP (Borges et al., Reference Borges, Gayer-Anderson and Mondelli2013; Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019; van Venrooij et al., Reference van Venrooij, Fluitman, Lijmer, Kavelaars, Heijnen, Westenberg, Kahn and Gispen-de Wied2012), while during the CHR phase cortisol levels are lower than controls in some but not all studies (Appiah-Kusi et al., Reference Appiah-Kusi, Petros, Wilson, Colizzi, Bossong, Valmaggia, Mondelli, McGuire and Bhattacharyya2020; Carol et al., Reference Carol, Spencer and Mittal2021; M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013). In addition to cortisol, measures of heart rate and blood pressure have also been taken during the TSST: systolic blood pressure was found to be blunted in CHR subjects (M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013), but in FEP systolic blood pressure was only lower during the anticipation period just before the TSST and comparatively elevated after it (Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019).

Notable in these literatures is that nearly all analyses to date have been between a single clinical versus a nonclinical population; there are few comparisons of psychobiological response to stress across multiple clinical stages of early psychosis. The outlier to this, a positron emission tomography study, found that dopamine release in response to an imaging-based stress task was lowest in healthy controls and successively higher in CHR and FEP subjects, with cortisol response conversely lowest in controls and successively higher in CHR followed by schizophrenia (Mizrahi et al., Reference Mizrahi, Addington, Rusjan, Suridjan, Ng, Boileau, Pruessner, Remington, Houle and Wilson2012). Despite demonstrating a progressive increase rather than blunting of cortisol, this nonetheless indicates a stage-based dysregulation of HPA stress response: beginning in CHR and escalating into threshold-level psychosis.

The knowledge limitations in this area are particularly consequential given recent attention to clinical staging models (P. D. McGorry & Hickie, Reference McGorry and Hickie2019; J. L. Shah, Reference Shah2019) and the continuum of stage-specific services from CHR to FEP and eventually persistent psychoses (J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Jones, van Os, McGorry and Gülöksüz2022). Such models have embraced the idea that promising biomarkers (or combinations of them) may demarcate the contours of neurobiological dysregulation, via variation or cut-points between specific clinical stages (P. McGorry et al., Reference McGorry, Keshavan, Goldstone, Amminger, Allott, Berk, Lavoie, Pantelis, Yung, Wood and Hickie2014; J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Chakravarty, Joober and Lepage2016; J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Scott, McGorry, Cross, Keshavan, Nelson, Wood, Marwaha, Yung, Scott, Öngür, Conus, Henry and Hickie2020). Stage-based analyses could then provide insight regarding which biomarkers track alongside stage progression, if and when they diverge from clinical presentation, and how to optimally link staging with treatment selection. In part due to the difficulty of coordinating studies across multistage clinical infrastructures, however, data on such analyses are also relatively sparse – with some exceptions (Lin et al., Reference Lin, Reniers and Wood2013; Mizrahi et al., Reference Mizrahi, Addington, Rusjan, Suridjan, Ng, Boileau, Pruessner, Remington, Houle and Wilson2012; D. Velakoulis, Wood, & Wong, Reference Velakoulis, Wood and Wong2006; Wood et al., Reference Wood, Yung, McGorry and Pantelis2011; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Zhang, Shah, Li, Sweeney, Li and Gong2022). In early psychosis, it would be especially valuable to harness existing samples across clinical stages to examine whether cortisol blunting in the face of psychosocial stress is stable or progresses from CHR to FEP.

A related question is whether the cortisol response to acute stress differs not just between clinical stages but also across symptom trajectories within the early psychosis continuum. For example, emerging evidence suggests that most CHR individuals do not develop threshold-level symptoms (and therefore have only sub-threshold psychotic syndromes that do not progress to a threshold-level stage) (Salazar de Pablo et al., Reference Salazar de Pablo, Radua, Pereira, Bonoldi, Arienti, Besana, Soardo, Cabras, Fortea, Catalan, Vaquerizo-Serrano, Coronelli, Kaur, Da Silva, Shin, Solmi, Brondino, Politi, McGuire and Fusar-Poli2021), while a majority of FEP patients experience an initial sub-threshold psychotic syndrome (consistent with a prior CHR state) that then progresses to threshold-level stages (Schultze-Lutter et al., Reference Schultze-Lutter, Rahman, Ruhrmann, Michel, Schimmelmann, Maier and Klosterkötter2015; J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Crawford, Mustafa, Iyer, Joober and Malla2017). These trajectories may be associated with a range of longitudinal clinical and functional outcomes (Daneault et al., Reference Daneault, Maraj, Lepage, Malla, Schmitz, Iyer, Joober and Shah2019; Rosengard et al., Reference Rosengard, Malla, Mustafa, Iyer, Joober, Bodnar, Lepage and Shah2019), with implications for the shape and form of next-generation early intervention infrastructures (J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Jones, van Os, McGorry and Gülöksüz2022).

To examine these concepts, we harnessed an existing dataset in which both CHR and FEP groups were exposed to the TSST. This data set has previously revealed attenuated cortisol levels in each group as compared to nonpsychiatric controls (M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013; Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019) in addition to observations regarding subjective stress, cortisol awakening response, trauma and symptoms, and neurobiology (Azar et al., Reference Azar, Pruessner, Baer, Iyer, Malla and Lepage2018; M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013; M. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Boekestyn, Béchard-Evans, Abadi, Vracotas, Joober, Pruessner and Malla2008, Reference Pruessner, Iyer, Faridi, Joober and Malla2011, Reference Pruessner, Lepage, Collins, Pruessner, Joober and Malla2015, Reference Pruessner, King, Vracotas, Abadi, Iyer, Malla, Shah and Joober2019, Reference Pruessner, King, Veru, Schalinski, Vracotas, Abadi, Jordan, Lepage, Iyer, Malla, Shah and Joober2021; M. Pruessner, Vracotas, et al., Reference Pruessner, Vracotas, Joober, Pruessner and Malla2013; M. Pruessner, Bechard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Bechard-Evans, Pira, Joober, Collins, Pruessner and Malla2017). Recognizing that the same data set could also permit direct comparison between CHR and FEP response to a stress task as an exploratory analysis, we investigated whether the psychobiological response to acute social stress differs in these subgroups – potentially shedding light on the stage at which changes occur (prior to CHR versus between CHR and FEP). We hypothesized that unlike heart rate and blood pressure, cortisol blunting would be more pronounced with ascending stage and with severity/progression of psychotic symptoms across stages.

Method

Participants

The current study includes data collected on 134 subjects (45 healthy controls, 28 individuals at CHR, and 61 FEP), all aged 14-35 years, who participated in a project on the neurobiology of stress in early psychosis (M. Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, et al., Reference Pruessner, Béchard-Evans, Boekestyn, Iyer, Pruessner and Malla2013; Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019). CHR and FEP subjects were all patients at the Prevention and Early Intervention Program for Psychosis (PEPP) in the Douglas Mental Health University Institute in Montreal, Canada, where they received phase-specific medical and psychosocial treatment and follow-up for up to two years (S. Iyer et al., Reference Iyer, Jordan, MacDonald, Joober and Malla2015; McIlwaine et al., Reference McIlwaine, Jordan, Pruessner, Malla, Faridi, Iyer, Joober and Shah2019; M. Pruessner, Faridi, et al., Reference Pruessner, Faridi, Shah, Rabinovitch, Iyer, Abadi, Pawliuk, Joober and Malla2017).

Exclusion criteria for the FEP service were prior exposure to antipsychotic medications for >30 days, organic brain injury represented by epilepsy or previous loss of consciousness >5 min, pervasive developmental disorder, IQ < 70, or a forensic history. For the CHR service, patients had presented with an at-risk mental state based on the Comprehensive Assessment of At-Risk Mental States (Yung et al., Reference Yung, Yung, Pan Yuen, Mcgorry, Phillips, Kelly, Dell'olio, Francey, Cosgrave, Killackey, Stanford, Godfrey and Buckby2005); they were excluded if there was prior use of antipsychotic medications for 7 or more days. In both CHR and FEP groups, individuals were excluded from the study if they had a history of neuroendocrine disorder or exposure to steroid-based medications.

Nonpsychiatric controls were recruited through fliers and advertisements in local newspapers and were confirmed by telephone interviews and the SCID-non patient (SCID-NP) to have an absence of mental illness, no prior psychosis in a first-degree relative, and no exposure to antipsychotic or antidepressant medications (First et al., Reference First, Spitzer, Gibbon and Williams2002). The study was approved by the Research Ethics Board of McGill University. All subjects signed a consent form outlining study procedures before the stress task began, and participants were compensated for their time.

Sub-threshold and threshold-level psychotic symptoms

Transdiagnostic staging models of psychosis development suggest four broad groups: patients with CHR who do not go on to develop FEP (subthreshold symptom group), those with CHR who convert to FEP (converters), those with who had an identifiable period of subthreshold psychotic symptoms then developed FEP (progressive symptom group), and those with FEP who had no identifiable period of preonset subthreshold psychotic symptoms (acute onset) (J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Crawford, Mustafa, Iyer, Joober and Malla2017).

Of 28 individuals experiencing a CHR state in our sample, 23 had only subthreshold psychotic symptoms (without conversion to FEP) while 5 were later determined to have converted to FEP up to 10 years after the cortisol assays (M. Pruessner, Faridi, et al., Reference Pruessner, Faridi, Shah, Rabinovitch, Iyer, Abadi, Pawliuk, Joober and Malla2017). Forty-seven of the 61 FEP subjects were identified as having experienced progressive subthreshold followed by threshold-level psychotic symptoms, (i.e., with symptoms that progressed from CHR to FEP), while the remaining 14 had an acute onset of psychosis without an identifiable period of preonset subthreshold symptoms. Measurement of preonset symptoms before a diagnosis of FEP was conducted through the Circumstances of Onset and Relapse Schedule (S. N. Iyer et al., Reference Iyer, Boekestyn, Cassidy, King, Joober and Malla2008; Norman et al., Reference Norman, Scholten, Malla and Ballageer2005), which compiles semi-structured interviews, a review of medical records, and interviews with relatives into a timeline that includes when and which of 27 early signs and symptoms were experienced by subjects before the onset of psychosis (S. N. Iyer et al., Reference Iyer, Boekestyn, Cassidy, King, Joober and Malla2008; Norman et al., Reference Norman, Scholten, Malla and Ballageer2005). Of the 27 signs/symptoms, nine (suspiciousness, odd ideas of reference, odd behavior, unusual perceptual experiences, disorganized speech, inappropriate affect, hallucinations, delusions, and passivity) had been previously identified by experts as constituting “attenuated positive symptoms/sub-threshold psychotic symptoms, if they appeared at a time when an individual would not have met criteria for a syndromal-level psychotic episode,” while the remaining eighteen represented a wide range of nonpsychotic signs/symptoms (Shah et al., Reference Shah, Crawford, Mustafa, Iyer, Joober and Malla2017). There was no overlap between the 5 CHR converters and the separate sample of 61 individuals experiencing a FEP.

To test whether there are observed differences in stress response markers between putatively divergent trajectories in early psychosis, we compared the 23 CHR participants who did not convert to FEP (subthreshold symptom group) with the 47 FEP subjects who had prior subthreshold psychotic symptoms (progressive symptom group).

Clinical variables

As noted, the control group was by definition not exposed to psychotropic medications, while the CHR and FEP groups were recruited from within a clinical service in which they were offered stage-appropriate treatment. For FEP this included antipsychotic medications as well as antidepressants or anxiolytics when required, while the CHR group was prescribed antidepressants and anxiolytics as needed but was not exposed to antipsychotics (Raballo et al., Reference Raballo, Poletti and Preti2021, Reference Raballo, Poletti and Preti2022). Medication exposure for each grouping is described in Table 1. Regarding the effect of antipsychotic medications on the HPA axis, previous work comparing FEP subjects with healthy controls has been mixed, with some findings (including our own) demonstrating no relationship between chlorpromazine equivalent medication doses and cortisol levels (Nedic Erjavec et al., Reference Nedic Erjavec, Uzun, Nikolac Perkovic, Kozumplik, Svob Strac, Mimica, Hirasawa-Fujita, Domino and Pivac2017; Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019), while other findings (including meta-analyses) suggest that most antipsychotic medications reduce cortisol levels (Meier et al., Reference Meier, Neumann, Jordan, Huether, Rodenbeck, Rüther and Cohrs2005; Subramaniam et al., Reference Subramaniam, LoPilato and Walker2019; E. Walker et al., Reference Walker, Mittal and Tessner2008).

Table 1. Medications used by participants according to comparison groups

Mood stabilizers include lithium, sodium valproate, and propranolol. The clinical group includes CHR and FEP participants. Participants in the sub-threshold symptom group were CHR participants who did not prospectively convert to FEP; participants in the progressive symptom group were FEP participants whose subthreshold psychotic symptoms developed into threshold-level psychotic symptoms. CHR: Clinical High Risk for psychosis. FEP: first-episode psychosis.

With respect to symptoms, since the two clinical groups differed based on stage of illness, it was expected that at least some of their baseline clinical outcomes would vary as well. We have previously compared their baseline symptoms via the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (M. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Iyer, Faridi, Joober and Malla2011): there were no differences between FEP and CHR groups in total or positive BPRS symptoms, potentially because of the use of antipsychotic medications in the former group. However, BPRS-negative symptoms were higher in the FEP group and BPRS depressive symptoms higher in the CHR group.

Stress measures

Subjective stress was captured in three ways. First, participants rated their subjective level of stress on a 10-point Likert scale during the public speaking and arithmetic tasks of the TSST (described below). Second, perceived stress in the past year was assessed with a 10-point Likert scale response to the single item question “How stressed did you feel in the past year?” Third, the Trier Inventory for Assessment of Chronic Stress included 30 items that measure (via self-report) multiple aspects of long-term psychosocial stress (Schulz & Schlotz, Reference Schulz and Schlotz1999); it has been validated in concordance with other stress measures and with cortisol secretion (J. C. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Hellhammer and Kirschbaum1999; Schulz et al., Reference Schulz, Kirschbaum, Prüßner and Hellhammer1998; Wust et al., Reference Wust, Wolf, Hellhammer and Federenko2000).

Trier Social Stress Test

First described in 1993, the TSST consists of three distinct periods – anticipation (10 min), test (10 min total), and recovery (60 min) (Kirschbaum et al., Reference Kirschbaum, Pirke and Hellhammer1993). It is characterized by uncontrollability and threat of social evaluation and is widely recognized as a validated experimental stress exposure (Allen et al., Reference Allen, Kennedy, Dockray, Cryan, Dinan and Clarke2017; Dickerson & Kemeny, Reference Dickerson and Kemeny2004; Seddon et al., Reference Seddon, Rodriguez, Provencher, Raftery-Helmer, Hersh, Labelle and Thomassin2020) across a range of measures (subjective stress, salivary cortisol, blood pressure, and heart rate), including in psychosis (Jones & Fernyhough, Reference Jones and Fernyhough2006).

In the current application of the TSST, the public speaking and arithmetic tasks were carried out in front of a committee (sitting behind a one-way mirror, but with two-way auditory contact) and a camera (Figure 1). After arrival at the testing unit, there was a 30-min resting period, during which participants were asked to read and sign the consent form and to complete emotionally neutral questionnaires. In the anticipation period, the committee was introduced and the task explained followed by 10 min of preparation time. During the 10 min test period, the first 5 min was reserved for the speech task and the second 5 min for mental arithmetic. Immediately following the test, a debriefing occurred in which subjects were told about the nature of the task and its goal of increasing levels of stress to measure neuroendocrine responses.

Figure 1. Physiological assessment times before, during and after the Trier Social Stress Test (from Seitz et al., Reference Seitz, Vracotas, Bechard-Evans, King, Abadi, Joober, Shah, Malla and Pruessner2019). Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

While salivary cortisol was measured at eight timepoints over the three test periods (Figure 1) using Salivette cotton swabs (Sarstedt, Germany), the first sample (at −30 min) was not included as it might be reflective of external influences on cortisol. The samples were frozen at −20°C until the time of analysis and assayed using time-resolved immunofluorescence (Dressendörfer et al., Reference Dressendörfer, Kirschbaum, Rohde, Stahl and Strasburger1992). Heart rate and blood pressure were also captured (as autonomic correlates of stress response) during the same time periods as cortisol sampling, using an automated blood pressure monitor (Omron IntelliSense HEM-711, Japan).

As cortisol levels vary throughout the day, variability due to diurnal rhythm was minimized by starting the TSST between 1 and 2PM for all participants (ending between 3 and 4PM); salivary cortisol during that time is relatively low, stable, and most susceptible to stressful stimulation (Kudielka et al., Reference Kudielka, Hellhammer and Wüst2009). In order to further standardize HPA activation, subjects were asked to not drink coffee or smoke cigarettes for at least 1 hr prior to the visit. They arrived approximately 30 min before the TSST began, to ensure a consistent period of rest/inactivity prior to the stress paradigm.

Statistical Analyses

Analyses were conducted in R version 4.1.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). We performed three types of comparisons: (1) clinical (CHR or FEP) vs. control group; (2) CHR vs. FEP; and (3) subthreshold vs. progressive psychotic symptoms. We report sociodemographic characteristics of each group descriptively, but in keeping with STROBE guidelines (Vandenbroucke et al., Reference Vandenbroucke, von Elm, Altman, Gøtzsche, Mulrow, Pocock, Poole, Schlesselman and Egger2007), we did not compute inferential statistics (i.e., p-values) for descriptive analyses. Data were log-transformed when assumptions of normality were violated, as indicated in results. Missing data were replaced by multiple imputations using the mice package version 3.14.0 (van Buuren & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, Reference van Buuren and Groothuis-Oudshoorn2011). All available descriptive, predictor, and outcome variables in the dataset were used to generate 20 multiply imputed data sets by chained equations, which were subsequently pooled in the regression models to account for uncertainty of the imputations.

To compare perceived stress levels, we regressed them on the group variables (either (1) clinical vs. control, (2) CHR vs. FEP, or (3) subthreshold vs. progressive psychotic symptoms) in linear models. To compare psychobiological outcomes over time between groups, we applied linear mixed models. These models allowed us to account for the nested structure of the data (i.e., repeated measures of outcomes within individuals) while examining differences between participant groups across time points. Outcomes were regressed on group (either (1) clinical vs. control, (2) CHR vs. FEP, or (3) subthreshold vs. progressive psychotic symptoms) and time in minutes. We applied unstructured covariance matrices and random intercepts.

We further compared psychobiological responses between groups according to the area under the curve with respect to ground (AUCg) and increase (AUCi) (J. C. Pruessner et al., Reference Pruessner, Kirschbaum, Meinlschmid and Hellhammer2003).

We defined statistical significance as p < .05 or 95% confidence intervals not overlapping the null. For all models, we calculated standardized mean differences (SMD) between groups using the emmeans package version 1.7.2. SMD in linear mixed models were estimated by combining random-effect variances.

Results

Sample characteristics

Characteristics of participants are presented in Table 2. Participants in the overall clinical group (CHR plus FEP) were less likely to have college-level education and were more likely to use cannabis compared with participants in the control group. Participants in the FEP group were older and more likely to use cigarettes than participants in the CHR group. FEP subjects with progressive psychotic symptoms were older and more likely to smoke cigarettes than CHR participants with only sub-threshold symptoms.

Table 2. Characteristics of participants according to comparison groups

The clinical group includes CHR and FEP participants. Participants in the sub-threshold symptom group were CHR participants who did not prospectively convert to FEP; participants in the progressive symptom group were FEP participants whose subthreshold psychotic symptoms developed into threshold-level psychotic symptoms. Cigarette smoking was defined as 5 cigarettes or more daily. Cannabis use was defined as any use in the past 3 months. CHR: Clinical High Risk for psychosis. FEP: first-episode psychosis.

In the total sample, the proportion of missing data ranged from 2% for cortisol to 23% for blood pressure and heart rate measures. There was no missing data on the sociodemographic characteristics presented in Table 2. The associations of age and sex with primary outcome measures are presented in Supplementary Material 1.

Stress measures

Perceived stress

Stress scores during the arithmetic task did not differ between the clinical and control groups (SMD = 0.05; 95% CI: −0.31, 0.41), between the FEP and CHR groups (SMD = −0.25; 95% CI: −0.70, 0.20), and between the progressive and stable sub-threshold psychotic symptom groups (SMD = −0.31; 95% CI: −0.81, 0.20). Mean differences in stress scores during the public speaking task were of similar magnitude and not significant (data not shown). Relative to participants in the control group, participants in the clinical group had higher levels of perceived stress in the past year: SMD = 0.42 (95% CI: 0.05, 0.80). There were no differences in past-year stress scores between FEP and CHR groups (SMD = −0.24; 95% CI: −0.71, 0.22), or in the subthreshold versus progressive psychotic symptom trajectory groups (SMD = −0.21; 95% CI: −0.72, 0.30).

Trier Inventory of Chronic Stress

Differences in chronic stress levels were not statistically significant between the clinical and control groups (SMD = −0.02; 95% CI: −0.39, 0.34), between the FEP and CHR groups (SMD = −0.41; 95% CI: −0.87, 0.05), or between the subthreshold and progressive psychotic symptom groups (SMD = −0.36; 95% CI: −0.87, 0.15).

Psychobiological measures during the Trier Social Stress Test

Cortisol, heart rate, and blood pressure during the Trier Social Stress Test are presented in Figure 2 (clinical vs. control groups), Figure 3 (FEP vs. CHR), and Figure 4 (stable versus progressive psychotic symptoms). The between-group SMDs for log cortisol, heart rate, and blood pressure are presented in Table 3a and detailed below.

Figure 2. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (control vs. clinical groups). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

Figure 3. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (Clinical High Risk vs. First-Episode Psychosis). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

Figure 4. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (sub-threshold vs. progressive psychotic symptoms). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview. Participants in the sub-threshold symptom group were CHR participants who did not prospectively convert to FEP; participants in the progressive psychotic symptom group were FEP participants with prior subthreshold psychotic symptoms.

Table 3. Group differences in overall cortisol and hemodynamic measures during the Trier Social Stress Test

From linear mixed models pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets, adjusted for age and sex in 3b. The clinical group includes CHR and FEP participants. Participants in the sub-threshold symptom group were CHR participants who did not prospectively convert to FEP; participants in the progressive symptom group were FEP participants whose subthreshold psychotic symptoms developed into threshold-level psychotic symptoms. In bold: statistically significant estimates. CHR: Clinical High Risk for psychosis. FEP: first-episode psychosis.

On average across the entire observation period, participants in the clinical group had lower levels of cortisol than participants in the control group; the two groups did not differ on heart rate or systolic/diastolic blood pressure. There were no significant differences in cortisol, heart rate, or blood pressure between participants in the CHR and FEP groups, with the exception of higher systolic blood pressure in FEP compared with CHR. There were no differences between the subthreshold and progressive psychotic symptom trajectory groups in terms of cortisol, heart rate, and systolic and diastolic blood pressure.

In adjusted analyses with age and sex as covariates, significant differences in cortisol between the control and clinical group remained, while heart rate was significantly elevated in FEP compared to CHR (Table 3b). The observed difference in systolic blood pressure in FEP was no longer significant in the adjusted analysis.

Between-group SMD for area under the curve of cortisol, heart rate, and blood pressure are presented in Supplementary Material 2: cortisol log AUCg was significantly lower among the clinical group compared with the control group, indicating overall lower baseline cortisol and response during the TSST, and systolic blood pressure AUCg was significantly higher among FEP participants compared with CHR participants.

Discussion

Despite the desire to link biomarkers with clinical staging models in psychiatry, relatively few studies have examined the neurobiology of stress response across multiple stages of schizophrenia or psychosis. To address this gap, we observed subjective and psychobiological responses to a controlled experimental stressor, the Trier Social Stress Test, in patients across early stages and symptom trajectories of psychosis. Using standard outcome and area under the curve analyses, we noted increased background subjective stress and relative cortisol blunting in the overall clinical group (including CHR and FEP), but with select autonomic measures being higher in FEP compared to CHR patients.

The notion that biomarkers may vary across stages has been articulated elsewhere (P. McGorry et al., Reference McGorry, Keshavan, Goldstone, Amminger, Allott, Berk, Lavoie, Pantelis, Yung, Wood and Hickie2014; J. L. Shah et al., Reference Shah, Chakravarty, Joober and Lepage2016) but only initially studied in psychosis (Lin et al., Reference Lin, Reniers and Wood2013; Mizrahi et al., Reference Mizrahi, Addington, Rusjan, Suridjan, Ng, Boileau, Pruessner, Remington, Houle and Wilson2012; D. Velakoulis, Wood, Wong, et al., Reference Velakoulis, Wood, Wong, McGorry, Yung, Phillips, Smith, Brewer, Proffitt, Desmond and Pantelis2006; Wood et al., Reference Wood, Yung, McGorry and Pantelis2011; Zhao et al., Reference Zhao, Zhang, Shah, Li, Sweeney, Li and Gong2022). Our findings are consistent with previous efforts demonstrating a dysregulated HPA axis and autonomic nervous system in early psychosis, but augment them by indicating that individual biomarker changes may differentially emerge at particular stages en route to psychotic illness. Specifically, they suggest that cortisol blunting in response to acute psychosocial stress emerges either before or during the CHR phase, but without further progression prior to a FEP. In contrast, it may be that systolic blood pressure or heart rate dysregulation progresses from CHR to FEP.

It is worth noting that while findings of cortisol blunting in stress response have been reported at various stages of psychosis, they may appear at first glance to contradict the idea of a hyperactive HPA axis in the context of stress vulnerability. However, it may be possible to reconcile these phenomena: we have previously speculated that a chronically overactivated HPA axis (with elevated basal cortisol) may eventually become overwhelmed, resulting in exhaustion and minimal capacity for the otherwise normal phasic response to acute stress (ultimately manifesting as blunted cortisol) (M. Pruessner, Cullen, et al., Reference Pruessner, Cullen, Aas and Walker2017; J. L. Shah & Malla, Reference Shah and Malla2015). The current results suggest that any exhaustion of the potential for acute cortisol response occurs at a relatively early stage (before or during CHR) and may remain in place (rather than progressing further) during FEP. In so doing, they demonstrate the potential utility of examining biomarkers for understanding and optimizing stage-based frameworks over time.

The mixed results regarding cortisol blunting seen in the current findings are not unique (Ciufolini et al., Reference Ciufolini, Dazzan, Kempton, Pariante and Mondelli2014; Dauvermann & Donohoe, Reference Dauvermann and Donohoe2019; Lange et al., Reference Lange, Deutschenbaur, Borgwardt, Lang, Walter and Huber2017; Zorn et al., Reference Zorn, Schür, Boks, Kahn, Joëls and Vinkers2017). They may be due to differential settings and contexts (for instance, medication exposure differs across clinical groups) or the samples themselves (we included both affective and nonaffective FEP, whereas many analyses include only the former). In this way, symptom or other trajectories (Paquin, Cupo, et al., Reference Paquin, Cupo, Malla, Iyer, Joober and Shah2021) could complement clinical stage alone for understandings of biomarker evolution.

Although the vast majority of studies compare a single at-risk or later clinical stage to healthy controls, our approach demonstrates one of the first applications of stage- and trajectory-based analyses of neurobiological data. This ability to directly examine both multiple clinical stages and symptom trajectories in a single research infrastructure is unusual as well as a strength of our study. The TSST was also conducted rigorously – with consistent timing and a short period of inactivity prior to starting, in order to standardize baseline cortisol due to diurnal rhythm.

Nonetheless, stress and the psychobiological response to it is a multilayered phenomenon. Given this complexity, our modest sample sizes constrain our capacity to detect smaller between-group differences while also preventing the ability to adjust for multiple comparisons. Our initial findings should therefore be seen as suggestive (rather than conclusive), requiring further replication in independent and larger samples. Furthermore, the controls themselves were healthy (nonpsychiatric), with minimal psychopathology or evidence of help seeking. Ideally, the extent to which these and other differences between groups covary with other factors would be further illustrated with more detailed data on ethnicity, income, and additional demographic and clinical variables. They make it difficult to ascertain whether the differences found between clinical and control groups are due to psychosis specifically, or whether they would also exist in a psychiatric (but nonpsychotic) population, and more generally how representative the sample is in comparison to the general population.

Additional factors relevant to cortisol levels (such as the request to avoid caffeine and cigarettes for at least 1 hr before the TSST) could only be assessed by self-report, while others such as activity levels (some individuals bicycled to the appointment while others drove or took public transit) were difficult to control for. Finally, while we compared groups with different symptom trajectories – i.e., those with subthreshold versus progressive psychotic symptoms – we were unable to examine within-subject change in psychobiological markers over time. Resolving these issues and the aforementioned conflicting findings will require larger studies that enroll individuals at multiple stages of illness and then follow them longitudinally across a range of symptom trajectories. Unlike the current exploratory analyses, which were undertaken with a pre-existing data set that was compiled for different purposes, future studies aiming to replicate or confirm our findings must therefore be explicitly designed and sufficiently powered for stage-based comparisons, and in comparison with psychiatric controls.

Conclusion

Our analyses demonstrate that some psychobiological differences in stress response may emerge prior to or at the point of CHR, while others may emerge between the CHR and FEP stages. In doing so, they demonstrate how stage- and trajectory-based comparisons can contribute to understandings of where and at what cut-points neurobiological changes emerge. Future work could build on this using larger sample sizes, across a range of additional biomarkers (e.g. neuroinflammatory, imaging, chronobiological, and otherwise), and with advanced statistical techniques such as cluster or latent class analyses and regression discontinuity designs.

Supplementary material

The supplementary material for this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579423000056

Funding statement

This research was supported by a NARSAD Young Investigator Award and Support by the Golden Family Foundation to Marita Pruessner. JLS and RJ were supported by a clinician-scientist salary award from the Fonds de Recherche du Québec–Santé; AKM was supported by the Canada Research Chairs Program.

Conflicts of interest

The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

References

Allen, A. P., Kennedy, P. J., Dockray, S., Cryan, J. F., Dinan, T. G., & Clarke, G. (2017). The Trier Social Stress Test: Principles and practice. Neurobiology of Stress, 6, 113126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ynstr.2016.11.001 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Appiah-Kusi, E., Petros, N., Wilson, R., Colizzi, M., Bossong, M. G., Valmaggia, L., Mondelli, V., McGuire, P., & Bhattacharyya, S. (2020). Effects of short-term cannabidiol treatment on response to social stress in subjects at clinical high risk of developing psychosis. Psychopharmacology, 237(4), 11211130. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00213-019-05442-6 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Arseneault, L., Cannon, M., Fisher, H. L., Polanczyk, G., Moffitt, T. E., & Caspi, A. (2011). Childhood trauma and children’s emerging psychotic symptoms: A genetically sensitive longitudinal cohort study. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 168(1), 6572. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10040567 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Azar, M., Pruessner, M., Baer, L. H., Iyer, S., Malla, A. K., & Lepage, M. (2018). A study on negative and depressive symptom prevalence in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis. Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 12(5), 900906. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12386 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belvederi Murri, M., Pariante, C. M., Dazzan, P., Hepgul, N., Papadopoulos, A. S., Zunszain, P., Di Forti, M., Murray, R. M., & Mondelli, V. (2012). Hypothalamic-pituitary–adrenal axis and clinical symptoms in first-episode psychosis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 37(5), 629644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2011.08.013 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borges, S., Gayer-Anderson, C., & Mondelli, V. (2013). A systematic review of the activity of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis in first episode psychosis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(5), 603611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.12.025 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brenner, K., Liu, A., Laplante, D. P., Lupien, S., Pruessner, J. C., Ciampi, A., Joober, R., & King, S. (2009). Cortisol response to a psychosocial stressor in schizophrenia: Blunted, delayed, or normal? Psychoneuroendocrinology, 34(6), 859868. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2009.01.002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carol, E. E., Spencer, R. L., & Mittal, V. A. (2021). Acute physiological and psychological stress response in youth at clinical high-risk for psychosis. Frontiers in Psychiatry/Frontiers Research Foundation, 12, 641762. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.641762 Google ScholarPubMed
Ciufolini, S., Dazzan, P., Kempton, M. J., Pariante, C., & Mondelli, V. (2014). HPA axis response to social stress is attenuated in schizophrenia but normal in depression: Evidence from a meta-analysis of existing studies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 47, 359368. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.09.004 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corcoran, C. M., Smith, C., McLaughlin, D., Auther, A., Malaspina, D., & Cornblatt, B. (2012). HPA axis function and symptoms in adolescents at clinical high risk for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 135(1-3), 170174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2011.11.035 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corcoran, C., Walker, E., Huot, R., Mittal, V., Tessner, K., Kestler, L., & Malaspina, D. (2003). The stress cascade and schizophrenia: Etiology and onset. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 29(4), 671692. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a007038 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cullen, A. E., Addington, J., Bearden, C. E., Stone, W. S., Seidman, L. J., Cadenhead, K. S., Cannon, T. D., Cornblatt, B. A., Mathalon, D. H., McGlashan, T. H., Perkins, D. O., Tsuang, M. T., Woods, S. W., & Walker, E. F. (2020). Stressor-cortisol concordance among individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: Novel findings from the NAPLS cohort. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 115, 104649. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2020.104649 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cullen, A. E., Fisher, H. L., Gullet, N., Fraser, E. R., Roberts, R. E., Zahid, U., To, M., Yap, N. H., Zunszain, P. A., Pariante, C. M., Wood, S. J., McGuire, P., Murray, R. M., Mondelli, V., & Laurens, K. R. (2022). Cortisol levels in childhood associated with emergence of attenuated psychotic symptoms in early adulthood. Biological Psychiatry, 91(2), 226235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2021.08.009 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cullen, A. E., Fisher, H. L., Roberts, R. E., Pariante, C. M., & Laurens, K. R. (2014). Daily stressors and negative life events in children at elevated risk of developing schizophrenia. The British Journal of Psychiatry: The Journal of Mental Science, 204(5), 354360. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.113.127001 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Daneault, J.-G., Maraj, A., Lepage, M., Malla, A., Schmitz, N., Iyer, S. N., Joober, R, & Shah, J. L. (2019). Medication adherence in first episode psychosis: The role of pre-onset subthreshold symptoms. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 139(4), 336347. https://doi.org/10.1111/acps.13011 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dauvermann, M. R., & Donohoe, G. (2019). Cortisol stress response in psychosis from the high-risk to the chronic stage: A systematic review. Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, 36(4), 305315. https://doi.org/10.1017/ipm.2019.27 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Devylder, J. E., Ben-David, S., Schobel, S. A., Kimhy, D., Malaspina, D., & Corcoran, C. M. (2013). Temporal association of stress sensitivity and symptoms in individuals at clinical high risk for psychosis. Psychological Medicine, 43(2), 259268. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291712001262 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dickerson, S. S., & Kemeny, M. E. (2004). Acute stressors and cortisol responses: A theoretical integration and synthesis of laboratory research. Psychological Bulletin, 130(3), 355391. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.130.3.355 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dressendörfer, R. A., Kirschbaum, C., Rohde, W., Stahl, F., & Strasburger, C. J. (1992). Synthesis of a cortisol-biotin conjugate and evaluation as a tracer in an immunoassay for salivary cortisol measurement. The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, 43(7), 683692. https://doi.org/10.1016/0960-0760(92)90294-s CrossRefGoogle Scholar
First, , Spitzer, , Gibbon, , & Williams, (2002). Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR Axis I Disorders—Non-Patient Edition (SCID-I/NP). New York State Psychiatric Institute.Google Scholar
Gispen-de Wied, C. C. (2000). Stress in schizophrenia: An integrative view. European Journal of Pharmacology, 405(1-3), 375384. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0014-2999(00)00567-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunnar, M., & Quevedo, K. (2007). The neurobiology of stress and development. Annual Review of Psychology, 58(1), 145173. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.58.110405.085605 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gunnar, M. R., & Talge, N. M. (2008). Neuroendocrine measures in developmental research. In Schmidt, L. A. (Ed.), Developmental psychophysiology: Theory, systems, and methods (pp. 343364). Cambridge University Press. https://psycnet.apa.org/fulltext/2008-09538-012.pdf Google Scholar
Horan, W. P., Brown, S. A., & Blanchard, J. J. (2007). Social anhedonia and schizotypy: The contribution of individual differences in affective traits, stress, and coping. Psychiatry Research, 149(1-3), 147156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2006.06.002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Horan, W. P., Ventura, J., Nuechterlein, K. H., Subotnik, K. L., Hwang, S. S., & Mintz, J. (2005). Stressful life events in recent-onset schizophrenia: Reduced frequencies and altered subjective appraisals. Schizophrenia Research, 75(2-3), 363374. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2004.07.019 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iyer, S., Jordan, G., MacDonald, K., Joober, R., & Malla, A. (2015). Early intervention for psychosis: A Canadian perspective. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 203(5), 356364. https://doi.org/10.1097/NMD.0000000000000288 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Iyer, S. N., Boekestyn, L., Cassidy, C. M., King, S., Joober, R., & Malla, A. K. (2008). Signs and symptoms in the pre-psychotic phase: Description and implications for diagnostic trajectories. Psychological Medicine, 38(8), 11471156. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291708003152 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jansen, L. M., Gispen-de Wied, C. C., Gademan, P. J., De Jonge, R. C., van der Linden, J. A., & Kahn, R. S. (1998). Blunted cortisol response to a psychosocial stressor in schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 33(1-2), 8794. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0920-9964(98)00066-8 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, S. R., & Fernyhough, C. (2006). A new look at the neural diathesis-stress model of schizophrenia: The primacy of social-evaluative and uncontrollable situations. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 33(5), 11711177. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbl058 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kirschbaum, C., Pirke, K. M., & Hellhammer, D. H. (1993). The “Trier Social Stress Test”–a tool for investigating psychobiological stress responses in a laboratory setting. Neuropsychobiology, 28(1-2), 7681. https://doi.org/10.1159/000119004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kudielka, B. M., Hellhammer, D. H., & Wüst, S. (2009). Why do we respond so differently? Reviewing determinants of human salivary cortisol responses to challenge. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 34(1), 218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2008.10.004 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kudielka, B. M., Schommer, N. C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Kirschbaum, C. (2004). Acute HPA axis responses, heart rate, and mood changes to psychosocial stress (TSST) in humans at different times of day. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 29(8), 983992. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2003.08.009 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lange, C., Deutschenbaur, L., Borgwardt, S., Lang, U. E., Walter, M., & Huber, C. G. (2017). Experimentally induced psychosocial stress in schizophrenia spectrum disorders: A systematic review. Schizophrenia Research, 182, 412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2016.10.008 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lin, A., Reniers, R. L. E. P., & Wood, S. J. (2013). Clinical staging in severe mental disorder: Evidence from neurocognition and neuroimaging. The British Journal of Psychiatry. Supplement, 54, s11s17. https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.112.119156 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lupien, S. J., McEwen, B. S., Gunnar, M. R., & Heim, C. (2009). Effects of stress throughout the lifespan on the brain, behaviour and cognition. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 10(6), 434445. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrn2639 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mann, K., Rossbach, W., Müller, M. J., Müller-Siecheneder, F., Pott, T., Linde, I., Dittmann, R., & Hiemke, C. (2006). Nocturnal hormone profiles in patients with schizophrenia treated with olanzapine. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 31(2), 256264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2005.08.005 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marks, E. M., Steel, C., & Peters, E. R. (2012). Intrusions in trauma and psychosis: Information processing and phenomenology. Psychological Medicine, 42(11), 23132323. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291712000505 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McGorry, P. D., & Hickie, I. B. (2019). Clinical staging in psychiatry. Cambridge University Press. https://play.google.com/store/books/details?id=gjGdDwAAQBAJ CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGorry, P., Keshavan, M., Goldstone, S., Amminger, P., Allott, K., Berk, M., Lavoie, S., Pantelis, C., Yung, A., Wood, S., & Hickie, I. (2014). Biomarkers and clinical staging in psychiatry. World Psychiatry: Official Journal of the World Psychiatric Association, 13(3), 211223. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20144 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McIlwaine, S. V., Jordan, G., Pruessner, M., Malla, A., Faridi, K., Iyer, S. N., Joober, R., & Shah, J. L. (2019). Does an integrated outreach intervention targeting multiple stages of early psychosis improve the identification of individuals at clinical high risk? Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 13(4), 989992. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12750 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meier, A., Neumann, A.-C., Jordan, W., Huether, G., Rodenbeck, A., Rüther, E., & Cohrs, S. (2005). Ziprasidone decreases cortisol excretion in healthy subjects. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 60(3), 330336. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2125.2005.02431.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Millman, Z. B., Pitts, S. C., Thompson, E., Kline, E. R., Demro, C., Weintraub, M. J., DeVylder, J. E., Mittal, V. A., Reeves, G. M., & Schiffman, J. (2018). Perceived social stress and symptom severity among help-seeking adolescents with versus without clinical high-risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Research, 192, 364370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2017.06.002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Misiak, B., Pruessner, M., Samochowiec, J., Wiśniewski, M., Reginia, A., & Stańczykiewicz, B. (2021). A meta-analysis of blood and salivary cortisol levels in first-episode psychosis and high-risk individuals. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 62, 100930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yfrne.2021.100930 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mizrahi, R., Addington, J., Rusjan, P. M., Suridjan, I., Ng, A., Boileau, I., Pruessner, J. C., Remington, G., Houle, S., & Wilson, A. A. (2012). Increased stress-induced dopamine release in psychosis. Biological Psychiatry, 71(6), 561567. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.10.009 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mondelli, V., Dazzan, P., Hepgul, N., Di Forti, M., Aas, M., D'Albenzio, A., Di Nicola, M., Fisher, H., Handley, R., Marques, T. R., Morgan, C., Navari, S., Taylor, H., Papadopoulos, A., Aitchison, K. J., Murray, R. M., & Pariante, C. M. (2010). Abnormal cortisol levels during the day and cortisol awakening response in first-episode psychosis: The role of stress and of antipsychotic treatment. Schizophrenia Research, 116(2-3), 234242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2009.08.013 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mück-Seler, D., Pivac, N., Jakovljević, M., & Brzović, Z. (1999). Platelet serotonin, plasma cortisol, and dexamethasone suppression test in schizophrenic patients. Biological Psychiatry, 45(11), 14331439. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0006-3223(98)00174-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Myin-Germeys, I., & van Os, J. (2007). Stress-reactivity in psychosis: Evidence for an affective pathway to psychosis. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(4), 409424. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.09.005 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nedic Erjavec, G., Uzun, S., Nikolac Perkovic, M., Kozumplik, O., Svob Strac, D., Mimica, N., Hirasawa-Fujita, M., Domino, E. F., & Pivac, N. (2017). Cortisol in schizophrenia: No association with tobacco smoking, clinical symptoms or antipsychotic medication. Progress in Neuro-Psychopharmacology & Biological Psychiatry, 77, 228235. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pnpbp.2017.04.032 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Norman, R. M. G., Scholten, D. J., Malla, A. K., & Ballageer, T. (2005). Early signs in schizophrenia spectrum disorders. Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 193(1), 1723. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.nmd.0000149214.17924.d9 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Palmier-Claus, J. E., Dunn, G., & Lewis, S. W. (2012). Emotional and symptomatic reactivity to stress in individuals at ultra-high risk of developing psychosis. Psychological Medicine, 42(5), 10031012. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711001929 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paquin, V., Cupo, L., Malla, A. K., Iyer, S. N., Joober, R., & Shah, J. L. (2021). Dynamic association of the first identifiable symptom with rapidity of progression to first-episode psychosis. Psychological Medicine, 19. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0033291721003755 Google ScholarPubMed
Paquin, V., Lapierre, M., Veru, F., & King, S. (2021). Early environmental upheaval and the risk for schizophrenia. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 17(1), 285311. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-clinpsy-081219-103805 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phassouliotis, C., Garner, B. A., Phillips, L. J., Bendall, S., Yun, Y., Markulev, C., Kerr, M., & McGorry, P. D. (2013). Enhanced cortisol suppression following administration of low-dose dexamethasone in first-episode psychosis patients. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 47(4), 363370. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867412465125 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, L. J., Edwards, J., McMurray, N., & Francey, S. (2012). Comparison of experiences of stress and coping between young people at risk of psychosis and a non-clinical cohort. Behavioural and Cognitive Psychotherapy, 40(1), 6988. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1352465811000397 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Phillips, L. J., Francey, S. M., Edwards, J., & McMurray, N. (2007). Stress and psychosis: Towards the development of new models of investigation. Clinical Psychology Review, 27(3), 307317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpr.2006.10.003 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Phillips, L. J., McGorry, P. D., Garner, B., Thompson, K. N., Pantelis, C., Wood, S. J., & Berger, G. (2006). Stress, the hippocampus and the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis: Implications for the development of psychotic disorders. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 40(9), 725741. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2006.01877.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, J. C., Hellhammer, D. H., & Kirschbaum, C. (1999). Burnout, perceived stress, and cortisol responses to awakening. Psychosomatic Medicine, 61(2), 197204. https://doi.org/10.1097/00006842-199903000-00012 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, J. C., Kirschbaum, C., Meinlschmid, G., & Hellhammer, D. H. (2003). Two formulas for computation of the area under the curve represent measures of total hormone concentration versus time-dependent change. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 28(7), 916931. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0306-4530(02)00108-7 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Béchard-Evans, L., Boekestyn, L., Iyer, S. N., Pruessner, J. C., & Malla, A. K. (2013). Attenuated cortisol response to acute psychosocial stress in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis. Schizophrenia Research, 146(1-3), 7986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2013.02.019 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Bechard-Evans, L., Pira, S., Joober, R., Collins, D. L., Pruessner, J. C., & Malla, A. K. (2017). Interplay of hippocampal volume and hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis function as markers of stress vulnerability in men at ultra-high risk for psychosis. Psychological Medicine, 47(3), 471483. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291716002658 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Boekestyn, L., Béchard-Evans, L., Abadi, S., Vracotas, N., Joober, R., Pruessner, J. C., & Malla, A. K. (2008). Sex differences in the cortisol response to awakening in recent onset psychosis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 33(8), 11511154. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2008.04.006 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Cullen, A. E., Aas, M., & Walker, E. F. (2017). The neural diathesis-stress model of schizophrenia revisited: An update on recent findings considering illness stage and neurobiological and methodological complexities. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 73, 191218. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2016.12.013 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Faridi, K., Shah, J., Rabinovitch, M., Iyer, S., Abadi, S., Pawliuk, N., Joober, R., & Malla, A. K. (2017). The Clinic for Assessment of Youth at Risk (CAYR): 10 years of service delivery and research targeting the prevention of psychosis in Montreal. Canada Early Intervention in Psychiatry, 11(2), 177184. https://doi.org/10.1111/eip.12300 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Iyer, S. N., Faridi, K., Joober, R., & Malla, A. K. (2011). Stress and protective factors in individuals at ultra-high risk for psychosis, first episode psychosis and healthy controls. Schizophrenia Research, 129(1), 2935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2011.03.022 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., King, S., Veru, F., Schalinski, I., Vracotas, N., Abadi, S., Jordan, G., Lepage, M., Iyer, S., Malla, A. K., Shah, J., & Joober, R. (2021). Impact of childhood trauma on positive and negative symptom remission in first episode psychosis. Schizophrenia Research, 231, 8289. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2021.02.023 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., King, S., Vracotas, N., Abadi, S., Iyer, S., Malla, A. K., Shah, J., & Joober, R. (2019). Gender differences in childhood trauma in first episode psychosis: Association with symptom severity over two years. Schizophrenia Research, 205, 3037. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2018.06.043 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Lepage, M., Collins, D. L., Pruessner, J. C., Joober, R., & Malla, A. K. (2015). Reduced hippocampal volume and hypothalamus-pituitary–adrenal axis function in first episode psychosis: Evidence for sex differences. NeuroImage: Clinical, 7, 195202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nicl.2014.12.001 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pruessner, M., Vracotas, N., Joober, R., Pruessner, J. C., & Malla, A. K. (2013). Blunted cortisol awakening response in men with first episode psychosis: Relationship to parental bonding. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 38(2), 229240. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2012.06.002 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raballo, A., Poletti, M., & Preti, A. (2021). Antipsychotic treatment in clinical high risk for psychosis: Protective, iatrogenic or further risk flag? The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 55(5), 442444. https://doi.org/10.1177/0004867420984836 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raballo, A., Poletti, M., & Preti, A. (2022). Antipsychotics in children and adolescents at clinical high risk for psychosis. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 61(3), 354356. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaac.2021.05.025 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Renwick, L., Jackson, D., Turner, N., Sutton, M., Foley, S., McWilliams, S., Kinsella, A., & O'Callaghan, E. (2009). Are symptoms associated with increased levels of perceived stress in first-episode psychosis? International Journal of Mental Health Nursing, 18(3), 186194. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1447-0349.2009.00600.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rosengard, R. J., Malla, A., Mustafa, S., Iyer, S. N., Joober, R., Bodnar, M., Lepage, M., & Shah, J. L. (2019). Association of pre-onset subthreshold psychotic symptoms with longitudinal outcomes during treatment of a first episode of psychosis. JAMA Psychiatry (Chicago, Ill.), 76(1), 6170. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.2552 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salazar de Pablo, G., Radua, J., Pereira, J., Bonoldi, I., Arienti, V., Besana, F., Soardo, L., Cabras, A., Fortea, L., Catalan, A., Vaquerizo-Serrano, J., Coronelli, F., Kaur, S., Da Silva, J., Shin, J. I., Solmi, M., Brondino, N., Politi, P., McGuire, P., & Fusar-Poli, P. (2021). Probability of transition to psychosis in individuals at clinical high risk: An updated meta-analysis. JAMA Psychiatry, 78(9), 970978. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2021.0830 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schultze-Lutter, F., Rahman, J., Ruhrmann, S., Michel, C., Schimmelmann, B. G., Maier, W., & Klosterkötter, J. (2015). Duration of unspecific prodromal and clinical high risk states, and early help-seeking in first-admission psychosis patients. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 50(12), 18311841. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1093-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, P., Kirschbaum, C., Prüßner, J., & Hellhammer, D. (1998). Increased free cortisol secretion after awakening in chronically stressed individuals due to work overload. Stress Medicine, 14(2), 9197. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1099-1700(199804)14: 3.0.CO;2-S>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schulz, , & Schlotz, (1999). The Trier Inventory for the Assessment of Chronic Stress (TICS): Scale construction, statistical testing, and validation of the scale work overload. Diagnostica, 45(1), 819.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seddon, J. A., Rodriguez, V. J., Provencher, Y., Raftery-Helmer, J., Hersh, J., Labelle, P. R., & Thomassin, K. (2020). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of the Trier Social Stress Test in eliciting physiological stress responses in children and adolescents. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 116, 104582. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2020.104582 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seitz, R., Vracotas, N., Bechard-Evans, L., King, S., Abadi, S., Joober, R., Shah, J. L., Malla, A. K., & Pruessner, M. (2019). The Trier Social Stress Test in first episode psychosis patients: Impact of perceived stress, protective factors and childhood trauma. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 105, 155163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2019.01.010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J., Eack, S. M., Montrose, D. M., Tandon, N., Miewald, J. M., Prasad, K. M., & Keshavan, M. S. (2012). Multivariate prediction of emerging psychosis in adolescents at high risk for schizophrenia. Schizophrenia Research, 141(2-3), 189196. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2012.08.012 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J. L. (2019). [Review of Bringing clinical staging to youth mental health: From concept to operationalization (and back again)]. JAMA Psychiatry (Chicago, Ill.), 76(11), 11211123. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2019.2003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J. L., Chakravarty, M. M., Joober, R., & Lepage, M. (2016). Dynamic endophenotypes and longitudinal trajectories: Capturing changing aspects of development in early psychosis. Journal of Psychiatry & Neuroscience: JPN, 41(3), 148151. https://doi.org/10.1503/jpn.160053 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J. L., Crawford, A., Mustafa, S. S., Iyer, S. N., Joober, R., & Malla, A. K. (2017). Is the clinical high-risk state a valid concept? Retrospective examination in a first-episode psychosis sample. Psychiatric Services, 68(10), 10461052. https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ps.201600304 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J. L., Jones, N., van Os, J., McGorry, P. D., & Gülöksüz, S. (2022). Early intervention service systems for youth mental health: Integrating pluripotentiality, clinical staging, and transdiagnostic lessons from early psychosis. The Lancet Psychiatry, 9(5), 413422. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2215-0366(21)00467-3 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J. L., & Malla, A. K. (2015). Much ado about much: Stress, dynamic biomarkers and HPA axis dysregulation along the trajectory to psychosis. Schizophrenia Research, 162(1-3), 253260. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2015.01.010 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shah, J. L., Scott, J., McGorry, P. D., Cross, S. P. M., Keshavan, M. S., Nelson, B., Wood, S. J., Marwaha, S., Yung, A. R., Scott, E. M., Öngür, D., Conus, P., Henry, C., Hickie, I. B., for the International Working Group on Transdiagnostic Clinical Staging in Youth Mental Health (2020). Transdiagnostic clinical staging in youth mental health: A first international consensus statement. World Psychiatry: Official Journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA), 19(2), 233242. https://doi.org/10.1002/wps.20745 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steiner, M. A., & Wotjak, C. T. (2008). Role of the endocannabinoid system in regulation of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenocortical axis. Progress in Brain Research, 170, 397432. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0079-6123(08)00433-0 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Subramaniam, A., LoPilato, A., & Walker, E. F. (2019). Psychotropic medication effects on cortisol: Implications for research and mechanisms of drug action. Schizophrenia Research, 213, 614. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2019.06.023 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
van Buuren, S., & Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K. (2011). mice: Multivariate imputation by chained equations in R . Journal of Statistical Software, 45. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v045.i03 Google Scholar
van Venrooij, J. A. E. M., Fluitman, S. B. A. H. A., Lijmer, J. G., Kavelaars, A., Heijnen, C. J., Westenberg, H. G. M., Kahn, R. S., & Gispen-de Wied, C. C. (2012). Impaired neuroendocrine and immune response to acute stress in medication-naive patients with a first episode of psychosis. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 38(2), 272279. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbq062 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Vandenbroucke, J. P., von Elm, E., Altman, D. G., Gøtzsche, P. C., Mulrow, C. D., Pocock, S. J., Poole, C., Schlesselman, J. J., Egger, M., for the STROBE Initiative (2007). Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE): Explanation and elaboration. PLoS Medicine, 4(10), e297. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.0040297 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Varese, F., Smeets, F., Drukker, M., Lieverse, R., Lataster, T., Viechtbauer, W., Read, J., van Os, J., & Bentall, R. P. (2012). Childhood adversities increase the risk of psychosis: A meta-analysis of patient-control, prospective- and cross-sectional cohort studies. Schizophrenia Bulletin, 38(4), 661671. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbs050 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velakoulis, D., Wood, S. J., & Wong, M. T. H. (2006). Hippocampal and amygdala volumes according to psychosis stage and diagnosis: A magnetic resonance imaging study of chronic schizophrenia, first-episode psychosis, and ultra-high-risk individuals. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63(2), 13949.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Velakoulis, D., Wood, S. J., Wong, M. T. H., McGorry, P. D., Yung, A., Phillips, L., Smith, D, Brewer, W., Proffitt, T., Desmond, P., & Pantelis, C. (2006). Hippocampal and amygdala volumes according to psychosis stage and diagnosis: A magnetic resonance imaging study of chronic schizophrenia, first-episode psychosis, and ultra--high-risk individuals. Archives of General Psychiatry, 63(2), 139149. https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapsychiatry/article-abstract/209301 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, E. F., Sabuwalla, Z., & Huot, R. (2004). Pubertal neuromaturation, stress sensitivity, and psychopathology. Development and Psychopathology, 16(4), 807824. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0954579404040027 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, E. F., Trotman, H. D., Pearce, B. D., Addington, J., Cadenhead, K. S., Cornblatt, B. A., Heinssen, R., Mathalon, D. H., Perkins, D. O., Seidman, L. J., Tsuang, M. T., Cannon, T. D., McGlashan, T. H., & Woods, S. W. (2013). Cortisol levels and risk for psychosis: Initial findings from the North American prodrome longitudinal study. Biological Psychiatry, 74(6), 410417. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2013.02.016 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Walker, E., Mittal, V., & Tessner, K. (2008). Stress and the hypothalamic pituitary adrenal axis in the developmental course of schizophrenia. Annual Review of Clinical Psychology, 4(1), 189216. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.clinpsy.4.022007.141248 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wood, S. J., Yung, A. R., McGorry, P. D., & Pantelis, C. (2011). Neuroimaging and treatment evidence for clinical staging in psychotic disorders: From the at-risk mental state to chronic schizophrenia. Biological Psychiatry, 70(7), 619625. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2011.05.034 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wust, , Wolf, , Hellhammer, , & Federenko, (2000). The cortisol awakening response-normal values and confounds. Noise & Health. https://www.jpgmonline.com/article.asp?issn=1463-1741;year=2000;volume=2;issue=7;spage=79;epage=88;aulast=Wust Google ScholarPubMed
Yeap, S., & Thakore, J. H. (2005). Stress axis dysfunction in schizophrenia. European Psychiatry: The Journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists, 20(Suppl 3), S307S312. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0924-9338(05)80181-6 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yung, A. R., Yung, A. R., Pan Yuen, H., Mcgorry, P. D., Phillips, L. J., Kelly, D., Dell'olio, M., Francey, S. M., Cosgrave, E. M., Killackey, E., Stanford, C., Godfrey, K., & Buckby, J. (2005). Mapping the onset of psychosis: The comprehensive assessment of at-risk mental states. The Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 39(11-12), 964971. https://doi.org/10.1080/j.1440-1614.2005.01714.x CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, Y., Zhang, Q., Shah, C., Li, Q., Sweeney, J. A., Li, F., & Gong, Q. (2022). Cortical thickness abnormalities at different stages of the illness course in schizophrenia. JAMA Psychiatry, 79(6), 560. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2022.0799 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zorn, J. V., Schür, R. R., Boks, M. P., Kahn, R. S., Joëls, M., & Vinkers, C. H. (2017). Cortisol stress reactivity across psychiatric disorders: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 77, 2536. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psyneuen.2016.11.036 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zubin, J., & Spring, B. (1977). Vulnerability--a new view of schizophrenia. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 86(2), 103126. https://doi.org/10.1037//0021-843x.86.2.103 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Figure 0

Table 1. Medications used by participants according to comparison groups

Figure 1

Figure 1. Physiological assessment times before, during and after the Trier Social Stress Test (from Seitz et al., 2019). Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

Figure 2

Table 2. Characteristics of participants according to comparison groups

Figure 3

Figure 2. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (control vs. clinical groups). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

Figure 4

Figure 3. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (Clinical High Risk vs. First-Episode Psychosis). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview.

Figure 5

Figure 4. Mean physiological parameters during the Trier Social Stress Test (sub-threshold vs. progressive psychotic symptoms). Mean physiological measures and their standard errors, pooled over 20 multiply imputed datasets. Time: relative to the simulated job interview. Participants in the sub-threshold symptom group were CHR participants who did not prospectively convert to FEP; participants in the progressive psychotic symptom group were FEP participants with prior subthreshold psychotic symptoms.

Figure 6

Table 3. Group differences in overall cortisol and hemodynamic measures during the Trier Social Stress Test

Supplementary material: File

Shah et al. supplementary material

Shah et al. supplementary material 1

Download Shah et al. supplementary material(File)
File 20.5 KB
Supplementary material: File

Shah et al. supplementary material

Shah et al. supplementary material 2

Download Shah et al. supplementary material(File)
File 15.4 KB