Abstract
Despite effective pharmacological treatments for psychotic symptoms (eg, hallucinations, delusions), functional outcomes for people with psychotic disorders are often disappointing. Although it is not included in the diagnostic criteria for psychotic disorders, cognitive impairment is one of the strongest determinants of community functioning in this clinical population, and thus it is an important target for intervention. In this review, we discuss the major areas of research regarding impaired cognition in psychotic illness. The specific topics covered include: (i) the prevalence of cognitive impairment in psychotic disorders; (ii) the profile and magnitude of cognitive impairment in psychotic disorders; (iii) the developmental course of cognitive impairment; (iv) the longitudinal stability of cognitive impairment; and (v) treatment approaches to improve cognitive performance in people with psychotic disorders.
A pesar de los tratamientos farmacológicos efectivos para los síntomas psicóticos (como alucinaciones y delirios), los resultados funcionales para las personas con trastornos psicóticos a menudo son decepcionantes. Aunque el deterioro cognitivo no está incorporado entre los criterios diagnósticos para los trastornos psicóticos, es uno de los determinantes más importantes para el funcionamiento social en esta población clínica y, por lo tanto, es un objetivo clave para el manejo. En esta revisión se discuten las principales áreas de investigación relacionadas con el deterioro de la cognición en la enfermedad psicótica. Los temas específicos abordados incluyen: 1) la prevalencia del deterioro cognitivo en los trastornos psicóticos, 2) el perfil y la magnitud del deterioro cognitivo en los trastornos psicóticos, 3) el curso evolutivo del deterioro cognitivo, 4) la estabilidad longitudinal del deterioro cognitivo y 5) los enfoques terapéuticos para mejorar el rendimiento cognitivo en personas con trastornos psicóticos.
Les résultats fonctionnels chez les sujets souffrant de troubles psychotiques sont souvent décevants malgré un traitement pharmacologique efficace des symptômes psychotiques (hallucinations, délire). Bien qu’il ne figure pas dans les critères diagnostiques des troubles psychotiques, le déficit cognitif est l’un des déterminants les plus forts du fonctionnement en communauté au sein de cette population de patients ; c’est donc une cible thérapeutique importante. Nous discutons dans cet article les principaux domaines de recherche concernant le déficit cognitif dans la maladie psychotique. Les sujets spécifiques abordés comprennent : 1) la prévalence du déficit cognitif dans les troubles psychotiques, 2) le profil et l’ampleur du déficit cognitif dans les troubles psychotiques, 3) l’évolution au cours du développement du déficit cognitif, 4) la stabilité longitudinale du déficit cognitif et 5) les approches thérapeutiques pour améliorer la performance cognitive des sujets atteints de troubles psychotiques.
Introduction
Psychosis refers to a constellation of symptoms categorized as positive (eg, delusions, hallucinations), disorganized (eg, odd speech and behavior), or negative (eg, anhedonia, avolition). These symptoms occur in primary psychotic disorders (eg, schizophreniform disorder, schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder) and the affective psychoses (eg, bipolar disorder with psychotic features, major depressive disorder with psychotic features), but can also occur in certain general medical cognitions or following exposure to some medications, substances, or alcohol. Schizophrenia, arguably the most severe and persistent psychotic illness, has a lifetime prevalence of about 1%, while psychosis more broadly is estimated to impact roughly 3% of the population. Citation1 Beyond the clinical symptoms of psychosis, the majority of individuals with primary psychotic disorders or affective psychosis also exhibit significantly impaired cognition. These impairments are indicated by reduced performance on neuropsychological testing, and have serious consequences for functional recovery in this clinical population.
Although early descriptions of schizophrenia by Kraepelin did emphasize cognitive decline (ie, “dementia praecox” or premature dementia), the dramatic positive symptoms of psychosis have historically been the primary focus of treatment efforts. However, despite effective pharmacological treatments for positive symptoms, functional outcomes for people with psychotic disorders are often disappointing. Indeed, schizophrenia is a leading cause of disability worldwide. Citation2 Since the 1990s there has been a renewed interest in cognition in the psychoses, as well as a growing recognition that psychotic illnesses are cognitive disorders. Citation3 , Citation4 Notably, cognitive performance is one of the strongest determinants of community functioning in people with psychotic disorders. Citation5 , Citation6 Thus, cognition has been established as an important treatment target to improve functional outcomes in people with psychosis.
In this review, we discuss a few of the major questions researchers have grappled with regarding cognition in psychotic illness. Specifically, what proportion of patients are impacted by cognitive impairment? What is the profile and magnitude of cognitive impairment? When do cognitive impairments occur during the illness course, and do they worsen over time? And finally, can we intervene to improve cognition?
Who is impacted by impaired cognition?
Cognitive impairment in primary psychotic disorders is ubiquitous, with approximately 80% of patients exhibiting clinically significant impairment (ie, at least one standard deviation below the population mean). Citation7 - Citation9 Notably, there is a subset of individuals who perform within normal limits Citation10 or in the superior range on neuropsychological tests. Citation11 However, even in the absence of clinically significant cognitive impairment, it has been argued that all individuals with a primary psychotic disorder perform at a level below what would be expected had they never developed a psychotic illness. Citation12 , Citation13 Evidence for this assertion can be found in studies of monozygotic twins discordant for schizophrenia Citation14 and studies comparing cognitive performance with expectations based on estimates of the individual’s premorbid level of intellectual functioning. Citation11 , Citation15 , Citation16
Compared with the vast literature in primary psychotic disorders, there are far fewer studies of the prevalence of cognitive impairment in the affective psychoses. The available evidence does suggest that cognitive impairment is common, with one study reporting approximately 60% of patients with affective psychoses exhibit clinically significant cognitive impairment. Citation9 However, the rates of cognitive impairment in affective psychoses are significantly lower than those observed in primary psychotic disorders. Citation9
What are the cognitive deficits in psychotic illness?
To date, several comprehensive meta-analytic reviews have been published comparing cognitive performance of individuals with schizophrenia with that of healthy adults. These empirical reviews consistently show markedly impaired performance across a wide range of cognitive tests and domains in schizophrenia, with mean effect sizes in the large range. Citation17 - Citation20 Notably, effects tend to be somewhat larger for tests assessing memory Citation17 - Citation20 and processing speed, Citation17 and slightly smaller for measures of language and vocabulary Citation17 - Citation20 and spatial reasoning. Citation17 , Citation20
Cognitive impairment in schizophrenia is not appreciably moderated by clinical factors such as duration of illness or positive symptom burden. Citation17 However, men may have more severe cognitive impairments, as larger effect sizes tend to be reported in studies with greater proportions of male patients. Citation17 , Citation18 While the Schaefer et al Citation17 review did not find a significant association between age of onset and magnitude of cognitive impairment, it has been reported elsewhere that more severe cognitive impairments are associated with youth-onset schizophrenia (ie, onset prior to 19 years of age), particularly for general intellectual functioning, processing speed, memory, and executive functions. Citation21
While a similar pattern of diffuse cognitive impairment is observed in schizoaffective disorder, the magnitude of impairment may be marginally reduced compared with schizophrenia. When cognitive performance of individuals with schizoaffective disorder are directly compared with those with schizophrenia, better performance is evident in schizoaffective disorder across a wide range of cognitive tests. However, these effects are small ( d ’s<0.32), suggesting limited clinical significance. Citation22 Compared with healthy adults, individuals with affective psychoses exhibit moderate to large deficits across cognitive tasks, with the largest patient-control differences observed for tests of attention, verbal fluency, and learning and memory. Citation22 , Citation23 However, the magnitude of cognitive impairment in affective psychoses is attenuated compared with schizophrenia. Citation22
One notable limitation of the research reviewed above is a lack of consensus regarding how cognition is assessed, both in terms of the specific cognitive tests administered, and the breadth of cognitive domains assessed. This lack of consistency makes direct comparison of findings across diagnostic groups and across studies very difficult. This has also been a tremendous barrier for treatment research, particularly for clinical trials of cognitive enhancing pharmacological agents and psychosocial interventions. Citation24 In 2004, the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) launched the MATRICS (Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia) initiative, which included a series of consensus meetings with experts from academia, industry, and government in multiple fields focusing on the methods that should be used in clinical trials to evaluate cognition-enhancing treatments for schizophrenia. Citation24 , Citation25 The MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB), Citation26 an FDA-recommended compendium of cognitive tasks, was a key product of the MATRICS initiative.
Creation of the MCCB involved a multistep process Citation27 that included consensus meetings to identify the important cognitive domains and candidate tests for each domain, Citation28 , Citation29 evaluation of candidate tests and selection of the final test battery, Citation30 and co-norming the test battery on a representative sample of healthy adults. Citation31 Seven cognitive domains were identified for inclusion in the MCCB: Speed of Processing, Attention/Vigilance, Working Memory, Verbal Learning, Visual Learning, Reasoning and Problem Solving, and Social Cognition. This seven-factor structure has since been supported with confirmatory factor analysis. Citation32 Of the 90 candidate tests evaluated, 10 were selected for the final MCCB battery based on factors such as test-retest reliability, utility as a repeated measure, relationship to functional outcome, tolerability (for patients), and practicality (for test administrators). The MCCB tests and their respective cognitive domains are listed in Table I .
Table I. MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) domains, tests, and performance indices. BAC, Brief Assessment of Cognition in Schizophrenia; WMS-III: Wechsler Memory Scale – 3rd Ed; NAB: Neuropsychological Assessment Battery; MSCEIT: Mayer-Salovey-Caruso Emotional Intelligence Test.
Adoption of the MCCB as a neuropsychological test battery in psychosis research is on the rise. At the time of this writing, ClinicalTrials.gov, an online registry of clinical trials across the globe maintained by the National Institutes of Health and National Library of Medicine, lists over 100 studies that employ the MCCB. Official translations of the battery are available for over 20 languages, and normative data on healthy adults have been collected in 10 countries in seven of the languages.
As a group, individuals with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder exhibit marked impairment across all seven MCCB domains, with performance ranging from about 1.0 to 1.7 SD below that of the healthy adult normative sample. Citation33 Relatively greater impairment is noted for the Speed of Processing and Working Memory domains, and relatively less impairment for Reasoning and Problem Solving. As the MCCB is adopted by an increasing number of clinical researchers, we expect profiles of MCCB impairment for different diagnostic groups to emerge. A recent study comparing MCCB performance in bipolar disorder with psychotic features, schizophrenia, and healthy adults found intermediate performance in the affective psychosis group. Citation34 Although the bipolar group was uniformly impaired compared with healthy adults on all MCCB domains with the exception of Social Cognition, the magnitude of impairment in bipolar was smaller compared with the schizophrenia group (ie, bipolar group performance approximately 0.5 SD below healthy adults).
What is the developmental course of cognitive impairment in psychotic illness?
Roughly coinciding with the renewed interest on cognition in schizophrenia, there was a shift in the conceptualization of psychotic illness from that of a neurodegenerative disorder to that of a neurodevelopmental disorder. Citation35 , Citation36 Evidence accumulated to indicate that subtle neurological and motor abnormalities preceded the onset of psychotic symptoms by many years, Citation37 , Citation38 raising questions regarding the developmental course of cognitive impairment in psychotic disorders. One question researchers have wrestled with is about the timing of cognitive impairment during the illness course. Specifically, are cognitive impairments present at the onset of psychosis, or perhaps does cognitive impairment precede the onset of psychosis?
To address the questions about the onset of cognitive impairment, we turn to studies examining cognition at early stages of the illness with recent onset (RO) psychosis (ie, individuals within the first few years of psychotic illness onset) and in samples at genetic high risk (GHR) (ie, first-degree relatives of schizophrenia probands) or clinical high risk (CHR, ie, individuals putatively prodromal for a psychotic illness). Results from a comprehensive meta-analytic review of 47 studies of cognition RO psychotic disorders indicate that marked cognitive impairment is already present at the onset of the illness. Citation39 Large effect sizes (SMD=-0.74 to -1.20) were evident in all of the ten cognitive domains assessed (ie, general cognitive ability, immediate verbal memory, delayed verbal memory, immediate nonverbal memory, processing speed, language, executive functioning, working memory, vigilance, motor skills, social cognition). Notably, the magnitude of these effects in RO psychosis mirror those observed in well-established psychotic illness. Citation17 - Citation20 Similar impairments are also evident in unmedicated RO psychosis samples, Citation40 indicating that cognitive impairments are not simply an artifact of exposure to psychotropic medications. The MCCB performance profile and magnitude of impairment in a sample of 105 people with RO schizophrenia was remarkably similar to that of individuals with chronic schizophrenia, although there was evidence for mild relative sparing of Working Memory and Social Cognition in the RO sample. Citation41 Longitudinal research, reviewed in the next section, adds further information concerning subtle declines in some cognitive domains occur during the course of illness.
Studies of groups at increased risk for development of schizophrenia address the issue of whether cognitive deficits actually precede the first psychotic episode rather than have an onset with psychotic symptoms. The initial attempts to address this issue focused on first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients, particularly children born to a parent with schizophrenia. Given that first-degree relatives have a 10-fold increased risk of schizophrenia compared with the general population and often share some schizophrenia susceptibility genes with their ill family member, this group is at increased genetic risk and has been examined to detect cognitive deficits that may reflect aspects of genetic vulnerability to develop this disorder. A series of studies of GHR samples documented that an attenuated magnitude of cognitive deficits are present. Citation42 , Citation43 A meta-analysis by Snitz, MacDonald, and Carter, Citation44 examining studies that included first-degree relatives of schizophrenia probands and demographically matched comparison samples, summarized this literature. First-degree relatives show a deficit in several domains of cognition, including processing speed, sustained attention, working memory, verbal memory, visual memory, and reasoning and problem solving, with deficits in sustained attention being among the largest. Citation44 These cognitive deficits are approximately half the magnitude of those typically found among schizophrenia patients. Furthermore, a longitudinal study of a sample of children born to a parent with schizophrenia found that those children who developed schizophrenia spectrum disorders by age 25 had shown sustained attention deficits at age 12. Citation45 Thus, the literature suggests that cognitive deficits occur at attenuated levels in GHR groups and may be genetic susceptibility indicators in those who have not yet experienced any psychotic symptoms.
Studies of CHR samples have started to add further evidence about the onset of cognitive deficits. Impairments across cognitive domains are evident, but the effect sizes tend to be smaller than those observed in RO psychosis and well-established psychotic illness. A meta-analysis of 19 studies reported small to medium effect sizes (g=-0.18 to -0.40) across the nine cognitive domains assessed (ie, general intelligence, verbal fluency, processing speed, attention, visual memory, verbal memory, working memory, executive functioning, and social cognition). Citation46
Notably, like GHR samples, CHR samples are very heterogeneous, and only a subset of these individuals go on to develop a psychotic illness. Thus, the magnitude of cognitive impairment in the CHR group as a whole may be less helpful to address questions about the developmental course of cognitive impairment in psychotic illness compared with the magnitude of impairment for the CHR subgroup that later develops psychosis (CHR+). In some published CHR studies, researchers report later clinical status (ie, whether the individual transitioned to psychotic illness within a specified follow-up period or not). Fusar-Poli et al Citation46 report that in the seven studies included in the meta-analysis that reported follow-up clinical status, the CHR+ group evidenced significantly greater impairment in general intelligence, verbal fluency, verbal and visual memory, and working memory compared with the CHR group who did not transition to psychosis during the follow-up period (CHR-). A subsequent meta-analysis of nine studies comparing baseline cognitive performance in CHR+ to CHR- found significantly poorer performance on tasks of working memory (ES=-0.29) and visual learning (ES=-0.40) in the CHR+ group. Citation47 Finally, a 2-year longitudinal study comparing cognitive performance in CHR and healthy comparison subjects found that baseline cognitive impairment was especially severe among the CHR+ group. Citation48 Moreover, in the entire CHR sample, severity of cognitive impairment at the baseline assessment was associated with increased risk for subsequent conversion to psychotic illness and non-remission of CHR status over follow-up. Citation48
A recent study comparing MCCB performance in a large sample of CHR (n=205), a RO psychosis group (n=28), a “help-seeking” comparison group (ie, individuals who did not meet CHR criteria, but were nonetheless seeking mental health services; n=89), and a healthy comparison group (n=60) found moderate impairment in Speed of Processing and Attention/Vigilance in the entire CHR group compared with the healthy comparison sample ( d =0.63 to 0.69), while the RO psychosis group exhibited greater magnitude of impairment across domains ( d =-0.72 to -1.09). Citation49 While the MCCB profile of the entire CHR group closely resembled that of the help-seeking comparison group, the MCCB profile for the CHR+ group (n=12) was extraordinarily similar to that of the RO psychosis group. These CHR+ participants significantly differed from the healthy comparison group in Speed of Processing ( d =1.10), Verbal Learning and Memory ( d =1.12), and MCCB overall composite score ( d =1.12). Thus, the pattern and magnitude of cognitive impairment in this CHR+ group closely resembled impairment observed in individuals with an established psychotic illness.
Taken together, the results of the GHR and CHR studies conducted to date support the view that significant cognitive deficits precede the onset of psychotic symptoms. Attenuation of effect sizes in GHR and CHR samples compared with established psychotic disorders likely reflects heterogeneity of these high-risk samples with respect to future clinical outcomes (ie, eventual transition to psychotic illness, stability or remission of subclinical symptoms, etc), at least in part. However, although more data are needed, the available evidence suggests that the pattern and magnitude of cognitive impairment in CHR+ may not substantially differ from that observed in established psychotic disorders.
Does cognition progressively deteriorate over the illness course?
Having established that cognitive impairment precedes the onset of psychotic illness, consistent with a neurodevelopmental conceptualization of psychotic disorders, questions remain regarding the longitudinal stability of cognitive impairment. Does cognition progressively deteriorate over the course of illness, or are the impairments relatively stable? Although the studies reviewed above reporting effect sizes in CHR+, RO psychosis, and well-established psychosis do not suggest major differences in performance across phases of illness; only longitudinal studies can directly address questions about stability.
Evidence from longitudinal studies in CHR are consistent with stability, and in some cases slight improvement, of cognitive performance over short-term (2 years) Citation48 and long-term (10 years) follow-up periods. Citation50 Indeed, a meta-analysis of 25 longitudinal studies of CHR, RO psychosis, and healthy comparison subjects found no evidence for progressive decline over follow-up (range= 0.5 to 7 years) in the CHR group. Citation51 Thus, the cross-sectional studies described in the previous section indicate that impaired cognition is already present during prodromal phase of psychotic illness, and there is no compelling longitudinal evidence for significant progressive deterioration of cognition during the transition to psychotic illness.
Similar evidence for stability is evident in longitudinal studies of RO psychotic illness over 1 to 5 years. Citation51 , Citation52 Stability is also reported over longer periods. A 10-year follow-up of 171 RO psychosis patients who participated in the OPUS early intervention study reported no significant change in performance on tasks of processing speed, set-shifting, verbal fluency, and design fluency, indicating stability of cognitive performance over 10 years. Citation53 Likewise, two additional smaller-scale follow-up studies also support stability of cognition over 10 years in RO psychosis. Citation54 , Citation55 Thus, these longitudinal studies do not support progressive deterioration of cognition during the transition between the early and well-established (ie, chronic) phases of psychotic illness. Notably, these longitudinal studies did not involve interventions that specifically targeted cognition.
Finally, most longitudinal studies do not support progressive cognitive decline during the chronic phase of psychotic illness, but there is heterogeneity in the course. A meta-analysis of 53 longitudinal studies of cognition in chronic schizophrenia found no evidence for decline in cognitive performance over follow-up (mean follow-up period=12 months, median=4 months). Citation56 However, a study of cognitive trajectories over a 3.5-year follow-up period indicated heterogeneity of cognitive outcomes in a large sample with chronic schizophrenia. Citation57 Specifically, cognitive stability was reported for 50% of the schizophrenia sample (ie, mean change of 0.03 points per year on the Mattis Dementia Rating Scale), a modestly declining trajectory for 40% (ie, mean change of -0.43 MDRS points per year), and rapidly declining trajectory for the remaining 10% (ie, mean change of -2.11 MDRS points per year). A declining trajectory was associated with factors such as living in a board-and-care facility (ie, not living independently), greater negative symptom burden, and an earlier age of onset of psychotic illness. Regarding cognitive changes later in life, a meta-analysis of 14 longitudinal studies of cognition in older adults with schizophrenia reported small effect sizes ( d =-0.10) for change in cognitive functioning over follow-up (mean follow-up period=2.21 years, range=1-6 years), indicating that cognitive performance did not appreciably decline. Citation58 However, marked cognitive decline late in life has been reported for people with a significant history of institutionalization. Citation59 - Citation61 These findings, along with those of Thompson et al, Citation57 suggest long-term stability of cognitive impairment for the majority of people with psychotic illness, but that a subset of individuals will experience progressive deterioration of cognitive functioning, especially in later life.
How can we treat impaired cognition in psychotic illness?
Previously, we established that cognition is an important treatment target, given the strong association between cognition and functional outcomes in people with psychotic disorders. In this section, we consider the status of research aimed to improve impaired cognition in psychotic illnesses. Most research efforts in this area fall into either relatively established approaches such as cognitive enhancing pharmacological agents or cognitive training programs, or relatively nascent approaches such as physical exercise or neurostimulation.
Results from large-scale studies and meta-analytic reviews indicate that antipsychotic medications can yield modest beneficial effects on cognitive functioning in people with psychotic disorders, although the findings have been inconsistent regarding whether atypical antipsychotics confer greater effects than typicals. Citation62 , Citation63 Notably, detrimental effects of antipsychotics on cognition are also possible, and have been associated with very high D2 receptor occupancy level, very high dosing, polypharmacy, and co-occurring use of anticholinergic medications. Citation64 , Citation65
Cognitive enhancing agents are pharmaceuticals that are posited to improve cognitive performance by acting on relevant neurotransmitter systems, typically the glutamatergic and cholinergic systems. The results of individual studies have been mixed, and a recent meta-analysis of 93 studies comparing cognitive enhancing agents to placebo reported a small (g=0.10) but significant effect of cognitive enhancers on overall cognition, but no significant effects on individual cognitive domains. Citation66 When individual neurotransmitter systems were considered, small positive effects were reported for glutamatergic (overall cognition g=0.19, working memory g=0.13) and cholinergic agents (working memory g=0.26). Major limitations of this literature are that many studies are underpowered to detect effects, studies investigating agents that act on neurotransmitter systems other than the glutamatergic and cholinergic systems are few, and the treatment durations are brief. Citation66 , Citation67
Cognitive training (CT) refers to psychosocial interventions that aim to improve cognitive performance through repeated practice to retrain a particular cognitive domain (ie, a restorative approach) or to offset cognitive impairment via cognitive strategies or environmental accommodations (ie, a compensatory approach). Citation68 CT interventions can be administered individually via computer programs, and training effects can be bolstered through group discussions designed to generalize gains on the trained CT tasks to activities of daily life (ie, “bridging groups”). Citation69 The results of clinical trials of CT have been promising regarding improvements on trained tasks, cognitive performance, and community functioning outcomes. Citation70 - Citation73 However, some studies report minimal transfer of CT gains to untrained cognitive tasks and community functioning. Citation74 - Citation76 A meta-analysis suggested that CT in the context of an active rehabilitation program may produce larger cognitive and community functioning improvements than CT alone. Citation73 Further research to identify predictors of treatment response and important aspects of CT that promote transfer of gains (eg, content area, delivery format, and intensity/dosing of CT, inclusion of a bridging component, timing of treatment during illness course, etc) is warranted.
Enhancing cognitive performance in psychotic illness through physical exercise and neurostimulation (eg, transcranial direct current stimulation, tDCS) is an exciting area of cognitive rehabilitation research. These methods have been investigated in isolation, and as part of a combined intervention with CT. Although the literature for these interventions is small, the results so far have been encouraging. A recent review of ten trials of physical exercise in schizophrenia reported small to medium effects on global cognition (g=0.33) and working memory (g=0.39), and medium effects for social cognition (g=0.71) and attention (g=0.66). Citation77 An empirical review of six studies comparing active tDCS stimulation to sham reports small positive effects of active tDCS for working memory and attention. Citation78
Concluding remarks
In this review we established that: (i) impaired cognition impacts the vast majority of individuals with psychotic illness; (ii) the cognitive impairments are diffuse (ie, impairment is evident across many cognitive domains) and the effects are large in magnitude; (iii) cognitive impairment is present prior to onset of psychotic illness; and (iv) for the most part, is relatively stable over time. Cognitive performance is a robust predictor of community functioning in people with psychotic disorders, and thus is an important target for intervention. Cognitive rehabilitation for psychotic disorders is a growing area of research. To date, most research efforts have focused on cognitive enhancing pharmacological agents and cognitive training (CT). Some trials of glutamatergic and cholinergic pharmaceutical agents have yielded modest improvements in overall cognition and working memory. CT has demonstrated efficacy, but further research is needed to identify predictors of treatment response and the factors that promote generalization of treatment gains. Physical exercise and neurostimulation are exciting and promising new areas of investigation, and it is possible that combining these novel treatments with other modalities (eg, combining exercise with CT) may yield greater cognitive gains.
Dr McCleery is supported by a career development award from NIMH (K23 MH108829). Dr McCleery has received compensation from MedAvante-Prophase Inc. for clinical assessment services unrelated to this project. Dr Nuechterlein’s current cognitive research on schizophrenia is supported by NIMH grant R01 MH110544. Dr Nuechterlein is an officer within MATRICS Assessment, Inc., the publisher of the MCCB, but does not receive any financial remuneration for his role. Dr Nuechterlein has received research grants from Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Posit Science, Inc., and Genentech, Inc., and has been a consultant to Astellas, Biogen, Genentech, Janssen, Medincell, Otsuka, Takeda, and Teva.
REFERENCES
- PeräläJSuvisaariJSaarniSIet alLifetime prevalence of psychotic and bipolar I disorders in a general populationArch Gen Psychiatry200764119https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.64.1.19 17199051
- WHO2018 Geneva, Switzerland World Health Organisation
- GreenMFNuechterleinKHShould schizophrenia be treated as a neurocognitive disorder?Schizophr Bull199925230931910416733
- KahnRSKeefeRSESchizophrenia is a cognitive illness: time for a change in focusJAMA Psychiatry201370101107111223925787
- GreenMFWhat are the functional consequences of neurocognitive deficits in schizophrenia?Am J Psychiatry199615333218610818
- FettA-KJKJViechtbauerWDominguezM-G de GPennDLvan OsJKrabbendamL201135573588https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2010.07.001
- PalmerBWHeatonRKPaulsenJSet alIs it possible to be schizophrenic yet neuropsychologically normal?Neuropsychology19971134379223148
- KeefeRSEFentonWSHow should DSM-V criteria for schizophrenia include cognitive impairment?Schizophr Bull2007334912920https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbm046 17567627
- ReichenbergAHarveyPDBowieCRet alNeuropsychological function and dysfunction in schizophrenia and psychotic affective disordersSchizophr Bull200935510221029https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbn044 18495643
- AllenDNGoldsteinGWarnickEA consideration of neuropsychologically normal schizophreniaJ Int Neuropsychol Soc200391566312570358
- VaskinnAUelandTMelleIAgartzIAndreassenOASundetKNeurocognitive decrements are present in intellectually superior schizophreniaFront Psychiatry201454524847284
- KeefeRSEEesleyCEPoeMPDefining a cognitive function decrement in schizophreniaBiol Psychiatry200557668869115780858
- WilkCMGoldJMMcMahonRPHumberKIannoneVNBuchananRWNo, it is not possible to be schizophrenic yet neuropsychologically normalNeuropsychology200519677816351353
- GoldbergTERaglandJDTorreyEFGoldJMBigelowLBWeinbergerDRNeuropsychological assessment of monozygotic twins discordant for schizophreniaArch Gen Psychiatry19904711106610722241508
- KremenWSSeidmanLJFaraoneS VToomeyRTsuangMTThe paradox of normal neuropsychological function in schizophreniaJ Abnorm Psychol.2000109474311196000
- HolthausenEAEWiersmaDSitskoornMMet alSchizophrenic patients without neuropsychological deficits: subgroup, disease severity or cognitive compensation?Psychiatry Res2002112111112379446
- SchaeferJGiangrandeEWeinbergerDRDickinsonDThe global cognitive impairment in schizophrenia: consistent over decades and around the worldSchizophr Res20131501425023911259
- FioravantiMBianchiVCintiMECognitive deficits in schizophrenia: an updated metanalysis of the scientific evidenceBMC Psychiatry201212164https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-244X-12-64 22715980
- FioravantiMCarloneOVitaleBCintiMEClareLA meta-analysis of cognitive deficits in adults with a diagnosis of schizophreniaNeuropsychol Rev2005152 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11065-005-6254-9
- HeinrichsRWZakzanisKKNeurocognitive deficit in schizophrenia: a quantitative review of the evidenceNeuropsychology1998123426445https://doi.org/10.1037/0894-4105.12.3.426 9673998
- RajjiTKIsmailZMulsantBHAge at onset and cognition in schizophrenia: Meta-analysisBr J Psychiatry20091954286293https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.060723 19794194
- BoraEYucelMPantelisCCognitive functioning in schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder and affective psychoses: Meta-analytic studyBr J Psychiatry20091956475482https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.108.055731 19949193
- BoraEYücelMPantelisCYucelMPantelisCCognitive impairment in affective psychoses: A meta-analysisSchizophr Bull2010361112125https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbp093 19767349
- MarderSRFentonWMeasurement and treatment research to improve cognition in schizophrenia: NIMH MATRICS initiative to support the development of agents for improving cognition in schizophreniaSchizophr Res20047215915531402
- GreenMFNuechterleinKHThe MATRICS initiative: developing a consensus cognitive battery for clinical trialsSchizophr Res200472113https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2004.09.006 15531401
- NuechterleinKGreenM2006 Los Angeles, CA MATRICS Assessment
- GreenMFNuechterleinKHGoldJMet alApproaching a consensus cognitive battery for clinical trials in schizophrenia: the NIMH-MATRICS conference to select cognitive domains and test criteriaBiol Psychiatry2004565301307https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2004.06.023 15336511
- NuechterleinKHBarchDMGoldJMGoldbergTEGreenMFHeatonRKIdentification of separable cognitive factors in schizophreniaSchizophr Res2004721293915531405
- KernRSGreenMFNuechterleinKHDengB-HNIMH-MATRICS survey on assessment of neurocognition in schizophreniaSchizophr Res20047211119https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCHRES.2004.09.004 15531403
- NuechterleinKHGreenMFKernRSet alThe MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, part 1: test selection, reliability, and validityAm J Psychiatry20081652203213https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010042 18172019
- KernRSNuechterleinKHGreenMFet alThe MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery, part 2: co-norming and standardizationAm J Psychiatry20081652214220https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07010043 18172018
- McCleeryAGreenMFHellemannGSet alLatent structure of cognition in schizophrenia: a confirmatory factor analysis of the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB)Psychol Med2015451226572666https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291715000641 25916421
- KernRSGoldJMDickinsonDet alThe MCCB impairment profile for schizophrenia outpatients: results from the MATRICS psychometric and standardization studySchizophr Res20111261-3124131https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2010.11.008 21159492
- SperrySHOLKÖngürDet alMeasuring cognition in bipolar disorder with psychosis using the MATRICS Consensus Cognitive BatteryJ Int Neuropsychol Soc.201921468472https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617715000442
- MurrayRMLewisSWIs schizophrenia a neurodevelopmental disorder?Br Med J (Clin Res Ed)19872956600681682
- WeinbergerDRImplications of normal brain development for the pathogenesis of schizophreniaArch Gen Psychiatry1987447660https://doi.org/10.1001/archpsyc.1987.01800190080012 3606332
- DicksonHLaurensKRCullenAEHodgins SMeta-analyses of cognitive and motor function in youth aged 16 years and younger who subsequently develop schizophreniaPsychol Med2012424743755https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291711001693 21896236
- WalkerEFSavoieTDavisDNeuromotor precursors of schizophreniaSchizophr Bull1994203441451https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/20.3.441 7526446
- Mesholam-GatelyRIGiulianoAJGoffKPFaraoneS VSeidmanLJNeurocognition in first-episode schizophrenia: a meta-analytic reviewNeuropsychology2009233315336https://doi.org/10.1037/a0014708 19413446
- Fatouros-BergmanHCervenkaSFlycktLEdmanGFardeLMeta-analysis of cognitive performance in drug-naïve patients with schizophreniaSchizophr Res20141581-3156162https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2014.06.034 25086658
- McCleeryAVenturaJKernRSSet alCognitive functioning in first-episode schizophrenia: MATRICS Consensus Cognitive Battery (MCCB) Profile of ImpairmentSchizophr Res20141571-33339https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2014.04.039 24888526
- GurRECalkinsMEGurRCet alThe Consortium on the Genetics of Schizophrenia: neurocognitive endophenotypesSchizophr Bull20073314968https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbl055 17101692
- NuechterleinKHDawsonMEInformation processing and attentional functioning in the developmental course of schizophrenic disordersSchizophr Bull1984102160203https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/10.2.160 6729409
- SnitzBEMacDonaldAWCarterCSCognitive deficits in unaffected first-degree relatives of schizophrenia patients: a meta-analytic review of putative endophenotypesSchizophr Bull2006321179194https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbi048 16166612
- CornblattBObuchowskiMRobertsSPollackSErlenmeyer-KimlingLCognitive and behavioral precursors of schizophreniaDev Psychopathol199911348750810532621
- Fusar-PoliPDesteGSmieskovaRet alCognitive functioning in prodromal psychosisArch Gen Psychiatry2012696562571https://doi.org/10.1001/archgenpsychiatry.2011.1592 22664547
- De HerdtAWampersMVancampfortDet alNeurocognition in clinical high risk young adults who did or did not convert to a first schizophrenic psychosis: A meta-analysisSchizophr Res20131491-34855https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2013.06.017 23830855
- LamMLeeJRapisardaAet alLongitudinal cognitive changes in young individuals at ultrahigh risk for psychosisJAMA Psychiatry2018759929939https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2018.1668 30046827
- CarriónREWalderDJAutherAMet alFrom the psychosis prodrome to the first-episode of psychosis: No evidence of a cognitive declineJ Psychiatr Res201896231238https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2017.10.014 29121595
- AllottKWoodSJYuenHPet alLongitudinal cognitive performance in individuals at ultrahigh risk for psychosis: A 10-year Follow-upSchizophr Bull2018111https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sby143 29140529
- BoraEMurrayRMMeta-analysis of cognitive deficits in ultra-high risk to psychosis and first-episode psychosis: Do the cognitive deficits progress over, or after, the onset of psychosis?Schizophr Bull2014404744755https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbt085 23770934
- RundBRA review of longitudinal studies of cognitive functions in schizophrenia patientsSchizophr Bull1998243425435https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.schbul.a033337 9718634
- BerghSHjorthøjCSørensenHJet alPredictors and longitudinal course of cognitive functioning in schizophrenia spectrum disorders, 10 years after baseline: The OPUS studySchizophr Res20161751-35763https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCHRES.2016.03.025 27050475
- BarderHESundetKRundBRet alTen year neurocognitive trajectories in first-episode psychosisFront Hum Neurosci20137643https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2013.00643 24109449
- HoffALSvetinaCShieldsGStewartJDeLisiLETen year longitudinal study of neuropsychological functioning subsequent to a first episode of schizophreniaSchizophr Res20057812734https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCHRES.2005.05.010 15964177
- SzökeATrandafirADupontM-EEMéaryASchürhoffFLeboyerMLongitudinal studies of cognition in schizophrenia: Meta-analysisBr J Psychiatry20081924248257https://doi.org/10.1192/bjp.bp.106.029009 18378982
- ThompsonWKSavlaGNVahiaI Vet alCharacterizing trajectories of cognitive functioning in older adults with schizophrenia: does method matter?Schizophr Res201314319096https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2012.10.033 23218560
- IraniFKalksteinSMobergEAMobergPJNeuropsychological performance in older patients with schizophrenia: A meta-analysis of cross-sectional and longitudinal studiesSchizophr Bull201137613181326https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbq057 20547571
- FriedmanJIHarveyPDColemanTet alSix-year follow-up study of cognitive and functional status across the lifespan in schizophrenia: a comparison with Alzheimer’s disease and normal agingAm J Psychiatry2001158914411448https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.158.9.1441 11532729
- HarveyPDBertischHFriedmanJIet alThe course of functional decline in geriatric patients with schizophrenia: cognitive-functional and clinical symptoms as determinants of changeAm J Geriatr Psychiatry200311661061914609801
- HarveyPDReichenbergABowieCRPattersonTLHeatonRKThe course of neuropsychological performance and functional capacity in older patients with schizophrenia: influences of previous history of long-term institutional stayBiol Psychiatry20106710933939https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsych.2010.01.008 20202624
- WoodwardNDPurdonSEMeltzerHYZaldDHA meta-analysis of neuropsychological change to clozapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone in schizophreniaInt J Neuropsychopharmacol200580345747215784157
- KeefeRSEBilderRMDavisSMet alNeurocognitive effects of antipsychotic medications in patients with chronic schizophrenia in the CATIE TrialArch Gen Psychiatry200764663364717548746
- HoriHNoguchiHHashimotoRet alAntipsychotic medication and cognitive function in schizophreniaSchizophr Res2006861-3138146https://doi.org/10.1016/J.SCHRES.2006.05.004 16793238
- SakuraiHBiesRRStroupSTet alDopamine D2 receptor occupancy and cognition in schizophrenia: analysis of the CATIE dataSchizophr Bull2013393564574https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbr189 22290266
- SinkeviciuteIBegemannMPrikkenMet alEfficacy of different types of cognitive enhancers for patients with schizophrenia: a meta-analysisNPJ Schizophr20184122https://doi.org/10.1038/s41537-018-0064-6 30361502
- KeefeRSEBuchananRWMarderSRet alClinical trials of potential cognitive-enhancing drugs in schizophrenia: what have we learned so far?Schizophr Bull201339241743522114098
- MedaliaAChoiJCognitive remediation in schizophreniaNeuropsychol Rev200919335336419444614
- BowieCRMedaliaABridging groups2016 Oxford, UK Oxford University Press 66
- ChanJYCHiraiHWTsoiKKFCan computer-assisted cognitive remediation improve employment and productivity outcomes of patients with severe mental illness? A meta-analysis of prospective controlled trialsJ Psychiatr Res201568293300https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2015.05.010 26028551
- GrynszpanOPerbalSPelissoloAet alEfficacy and specificity of computer-assisted cognitive remediation in schizophrenia: a meta-analytical studyPsychol Med2011410116317320380784
- McGurkSRTwamleyEWSitzerDIMcHugoGJMueserKTA meta-analysis of cognitive remediation in schizophreniaAm J Psychiatry2007
- WykesTHuddyVCellardCMcGurkSRCzoborPA meta-analysis of cognitive remediation for schizophrenia: methodology and effect sizesAm J Psychiatry20111685472485https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.ajp.2010.10060855 21406461
- GomarJJVallsERaduaJet alA multisite, randomized controlled clinical trial of computerized cognitive remediation therapy for schizophreniaSchizophr Bull20154161387139626006264
- JahshanCVinogradovSWynnJKHellemannGGreenMFA randomized controlled trial comparing a “bottom-up” and “top-down” approach to cognitive training in schizophreniaJ Psychiatr Res2019109118125https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpsychires.2018.11.027 30529836
- PrikkenMKoningsMJLeiWUBegemannMJHSommerIECThe efficacy of computerized cognitive drill and practice training for patients with a schizophrenia-spectrum disorder: A meta-analysisSchizophr Res2019204368374https://doi.org/10.1016/j.schres.2018.07.034 30097278
- FirthJStubbsBRosenbaumSet alAerobic exercise improves cognitive functioning in people with schizophrenia: A systematic review and meta-analysisSchizophr Bull2017433546556https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbw115 27521348
- MervisJECapizziRJBorodaEMacDonald AWTranscranial direct current stimulation over the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex in schizophrenia: a quantitative review of cognitive outcomesFront Hum Neurosci20171144https://doi.org/10.3389/fnhum.2017.00044 28210217