Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia

Richard S E Keefe, George M. Haig, Stephen R. Marder, Philip D Harvey, Eduardo Dunayevich, Alice Medalia, Michael Davidson, Ilise Lombardo, Christopher R. Bowie, Robert W. Buchanan, Dragana Bugarski-Kirola, William T. Carpenter, John T. Csernansky, Pedro L. Dago, Dante Durand, Frederick J. Frese, Donald C. Goff, James M. Gold, Christine I. Hooker, Alex KopelowiczAntony Loebel, Susan R. McGurk, Lewis A. Opler, Amy E. Pinkham, Robert G. Stern

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

If treatments for cognitive impairment are to be utilized successfully, clinicians must be able to determine whether they are effective and which patients should receive them. In order to develop consensus on these issues, the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) held a meeting of experts on March 20, 2014, in Washington, DC. Consensus was reached on several important issues. Cognitive impairment and functional disability were viewed as equally important treatment targets. The group supported the notion that sufficient data are not available to exclude patients from available treatments on the basis of age, severity of cognitive impairment, severity of positive symptoms, or the potential to benefit functionally from treatment. The group reached consensus that cognitive remediation is likely to provide substantial benefits in combination with procognitive medications, although a substantial minority believed that medications can be administered without nonpharmacological therapy. There was little consensus on the best methods for assessing cognitive change in clinical practice. Some participants supported the view that performance-based measures are essential for measurement of cognitive change; others pointed to their cost and time requirements as evidence of impracticality. Interview-based measures of cognitive and functional change were viewed as more practical, but lacking validity without informant involvement or frequent contact from clinicians. The lack of consensus on assessment methods was viewed as attributable to differences in experience and education among key stakeholders and significant gaps in available empirical data. Research on the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and practicality of competing methods will facilitate consensus.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)19-33
Number of pages15
JournalSchizophrenia Bulletin
Volume42
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 1 2016

Fingerprint

Schizophrenia
Consensus
Clinical Trials
Therapeutics
Reproducibility of Results
Cognitive Dysfunction
Interviews
Education
Costs and Cost Analysis
Research

Keywords

  • cognitive assessment
  • neuropsychology
  • treatment

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Psychiatry and Mental health

Cite this

Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia. / Keefe, Richard S E; Haig, George M.; Marder, Stephen R.; Harvey, Philip D; Dunayevich, Eduardo; Medalia, Alice; Davidson, Michael; Lombardo, Ilise; Bowie, Christopher R.; Buchanan, Robert W.; Bugarski-Kirola, Dragana; Carpenter, William T.; Csernansky, John T.; Dago, Pedro L.; Durand, Dante; Frese, Frederick J.; Goff, Donald C.; Gold, James M.; Hooker, Christine I.; Kopelowicz, Alex; Loebel, Antony; McGurk, Susan R.; Opler, Lewis A.; Pinkham, Amy E.; Stern, Robert G.

In: Schizophrenia Bulletin, Vol. 42, No. 1, 01.01.2016, p. 19-33.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Keefe, RSE, Haig, GM, Marder, SR, Harvey, PD, Dunayevich, E, Medalia, A, Davidson, M, Lombardo, I, Bowie, CR, Buchanan, RW, Bugarski-Kirola, D, Carpenter, WT, Csernansky, JT, Dago, PL, Durand, D, Frese, FJ, Goff, DC, Gold, JM, Hooker, CI, Kopelowicz, A, Loebel, A, McGurk, SR, Opler, LA, Pinkham, AE & Stern, RG 2016, 'Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia', Schizophrenia Bulletin, vol. 42, no. 1, pp. 19-33. https://doi.org/10.1093/schbul/sbv111
Keefe, Richard S E ; Haig, George M. ; Marder, Stephen R. ; Harvey, Philip D ; Dunayevich, Eduardo ; Medalia, Alice ; Davidson, Michael ; Lombardo, Ilise ; Bowie, Christopher R. ; Buchanan, Robert W. ; Bugarski-Kirola, Dragana ; Carpenter, William T. ; Csernansky, John T. ; Dago, Pedro L. ; Durand, Dante ; Frese, Frederick J. ; Goff, Donald C. ; Gold, James M. ; Hooker, Christine I. ; Kopelowicz, Alex ; Loebel, Antony ; McGurk, Susan R. ; Opler, Lewis A. ; Pinkham, Amy E. ; Stern, Robert G. / Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia. In: Schizophrenia Bulletin. 2016 ; Vol. 42, No. 1. pp. 19-33.
@article{da1831e478314275ad31f36ca6d53be2,
title = "Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia",
abstract = "If treatments for cognitive impairment are to be utilized successfully, clinicians must be able to determine whether they are effective and which patients should receive them. In order to develop consensus on these issues, the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) held a meeting of experts on March 20, 2014, in Washington, DC. Consensus was reached on several important issues. Cognitive impairment and functional disability were viewed as equally important treatment targets. The group supported the notion that sufficient data are not available to exclude patients from available treatments on the basis of age, severity of cognitive impairment, severity of positive symptoms, or the potential to benefit functionally from treatment. The group reached consensus that cognitive remediation is likely to provide substantial benefits in combination with procognitive medications, although a substantial minority believed that medications can be administered without nonpharmacological therapy. There was little consensus on the best methods for assessing cognitive change in clinical practice. Some participants supported the view that performance-based measures are essential for measurement of cognitive change; others pointed to their cost and time requirements as evidence of impracticality. Interview-based measures of cognitive and functional change were viewed as more practical, but lacking validity without informant involvement or frequent contact from clinicians. The lack of consensus on assessment methods was viewed as attributable to differences in experience and education among key stakeholders and significant gaps in available empirical data. Research on the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and practicality of competing methods will facilitate consensus.",
keywords = "cognitive assessment, neuropsychology, treatment",
author = "Keefe, {Richard S E} and Haig, {George M.} and Marder, {Stephen R.} and Harvey, {Philip D} and Eduardo Dunayevich and Alice Medalia and Michael Davidson and Ilise Lombardo and Bowie, {Christopher R.} and Buchanan, {Robert W.} and Dragana Bugarski-Kirola and Carpenter, {William T.} and Csernansky, {John T.} and Dago, {Pedro L.} and Dante Durand and Frese, {Frederick J.} and Goff, {Donald C.} and Gold, {James M.} and Hooker, {Christine I.} and Alex Kopelowicz and Antony Loebel and McGurk, {Susan R.} and Opler, {Lewis A.} and Pinkham, {Amy E.} and Stern, {Robert G.}",
year = "2016",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1093/schbul/sbv111",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "42",
pages = "19--33",
journal = "Schizophrenia Bulletin",
issn = "0586-7614",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Report on ISCTM Consensus Meeting on Clinical Assessment of Response to Treatment of Cognitive Impairment in Schizophrenia

AU - Keefe, Richard S E

AU - Haig, George M.

AU - Marder, Stephen R.

AU - Harvey, Philip D

AU - Dunayevich, Eduardo

AU - Medalia, Alice

AU - Davidson, Michael

AU - Lombardo, Ilise

AU - Bowie, Christopher R.

AU - Buchanan, Robert W.

AU - Bugarski-Kirola, Dragana

AU - Carpenter, William T.

AU - Csernansky, John T.

AU - Dago, Pedro L.

AU - Durand, Dante

AU - Frese, Frederick J.

AU - Goff, Donald C.

AU - Gold, James M.

AU - Hooker, Christine I.

AU - Kopelowicz, Alex

AU - Loebel, Antony

AU - McGurk, Susan R.

AU - Opler, Lewis A.

AU - Pinkham, Amy E.

AU - Stern, Robert G.

PY - 2016/1/1

Y1 - 2016/1/1

N2 - If treatments for cognitive impairment are to be utilized successfully, clinicians must be able to determine whether they are effective and which patients should receive them. In order to develop consensus on these issues, the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) held a meeting of experts on March 20, 2014, in Washington, DC. Consensus was reached on several important issues. Cognitive impairment and functional disability were viewed as equally important treatment targets. The group supported the notion that sufficient data are not available to exclude patients from available treatments on the basis of age, severity of cognitive impairment, severity of positive symptoms, or the potential to benefit functionally from treatment. The group reached consensus that cognitive remediation is likely to provide substantial benefits in combination with procognitive medications, although a substantial minority believed that medications can be administered without nonpharmacological therapy. There was little consensus on the best methods for assessing cognitive change in clinical practice. Some participants supported the view that performance-based measures are essential for measurement of cognitive change; others pointed to their cost and time requirements as evidence of impracticality. Interview-based measures of cognitive and functional change were viewed as more practical, but lacking validity without informant involvement or frequent contact from clinicians. The lack of consensus on assessment methods was viewed as attributable to differences in experience and education among key stakeholders and significant gaps in available empirical data. Research on the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and practicality of competing methods will facilitate consensus.

AB - If treatments for cognitive impairment are to be utilized successfully, clinicians must be able to determine whether they are effective and which patients should receive them. In order to develop consensus on these issues, the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) held a meeting of experts on March 20, 2014, in Washington, DC. Consensus was reached on several important issues. Cognitive impairment and functional disability were viewed as equally important treatment targets. The group supported the notion that sufficient data are not available to exclude patients from available treatments on the basis of age, severity of cognitive impairment, severity of positive symptoms, or the potential to benefit functionally from treatment. The group reached consensus that cognitive remediation is likely to provide substantial benefits in combination with procognitive medications, although a substantial minority believed that medications can be administered without nonpharmacological therapy. There was little consensus on the best methods for assessing cognitive change in clinical practice. Some participants supported the view that performance-based measures are essential for measurement of cognitive change; others pointed to their cost and time requirements as evidence of impracticality. Interview-based measures of cognitive and functional change were viewed as more practical, but lacking validity without informant involvement or frequent contact from clinicians. The lack of consensus on assessment methods was viewed as attributable to differences in experience and education among key stakeholders and significant gaps in available empirical data. Research on the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and practicality of competing methods will facilitate consensus.

KW - cognitive assessment

KW - neuropsychology

KW - treatment

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84954348301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84954348301&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1093/schbul/sbv111

DO - 10.1093/schbul/sbv111

M3 - Article

C2 - 26362273

AN - SCOPUS:84954348301

VL - 42

SP - 19

EP - 33

JO - Schizophrenia Bulletin

JF - Schizophrenia Bulletin

SN - 0586-7614

IS - 1

ER -