Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Aug 30;5(1):sgae018.
doi: 10.1093/schizbullopen/sgae018. eCollection 2024 Jan.

Biomarkers for Psychosis: Are We There Yet? Umbrella Review of 1478 Biomarkers

Paola Fuentes-Claramonte  1   2 , Andrés Estradé  3 , Aleix Solanes  4   5 , Valentina Ramella-Cravaro  3 , Maria Angeles Garcia-Leon  1   2 , Javier de Diego-Adeliño  2   5   6 , Conrad Molins  7 , Eric Fung  1 , Marc Valentí  2   4   8 , Gerard Anmella  2   4   8 , Edith Pomarol-Clotet  1   2 , Dominic Oliver  3   9   10   11 , Eduard Vieta  2   4   8 , Joaquim Radua  2   3   4   12 , Paolo Fusar-Poli  3   13   14
Affiliations

Biomarkers for Psychosis: Are We There Yet? Umbrella Review of 1478 Biomarkers

Paola Fuentes-Claramonte et al. Schizophr Bull Open. .

Abstract

Background and hypothesis: This umbrella review aims to comprehensively synthesize the evidence of association between peripheral, electrophysiological, neuroimaging, neuropathological, and other biomarkers and diagnosis of psychotic disorders.

Study design: We selected systematic reviews and meta-analyses of observational studies on diagnostic biomarkers for psychotic disorders, published until February 1, 2018. Data extraction was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Evidence of association between biomarkers and psychotic disorders was classified as convincing, highly suggestive, suggestive, weak, or non-significant, using a standardized classification. Quality analyses used the Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) tool.

Study results: The umbrella review included 110 meta-analyses or systematic reviews corresponding to 3892 individual studies, 1478 biomarkers, and 392 210 participants. No factor showed a convincing level of evidence. Highly suggestive evidence was observed for transglutaminase autoantibodies levels (odds ratio [OR] = 7.32; 95% CI: 3.36, 15.94), mismatch negativity in auditory event-related potentials (standardized mean difference [SMD] = 0.73; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.96), P300 component latency (SMD = -0.6; 95% CI: -0.83, -0.38), ventricle-brain ratio (SMD = 0.61; 95% CI: 0.5, 0.71), and minor physical anomalies (SMD = 0.99; 95% CI: 0.64, 1.34). Suggestive evidence was observed for folate, malondialdehyde, brain-derived neurotrophic factor, homocysteine, P50 sensory gating (P50 S2/S1 ratio), frontal N-acetyl-aspartate, and high-frequency heart rate variability. Among the remaining biomarkers, weak evidence was found for 626 and a non-significant association for 833 factors.

Conclusions: While several biomarkers present highly suggestive or suggestive evidence of association with psychotic disorders, methodological biases, and underpowered studies call for future higher-quality research.

Keywords: electrophysiological biomarkers; neuroimaging biomarkers; neuropathological biomarkers; peripheral biomarkers; psychotic disorders; schizophrenia.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1.
Fig. 1.
Standardized mean differences for peripheral biomarkers and psychotic disorders.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 2.
Standardized mean differences for electrophysiological biomarkers and psychotic disorders.
Fig. 3.
Fig. 3.
Standardized mean differences for neuroimaging biomarkers and psychotic disorders.
Fig. 4.
Fig. 4.
Standardized mean differences for other biomarkers and psychotic disorders.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Moreno-Küstner B, Martín C, Pastor L.. Prevalence of psychotic disorders and its association with methodological issues. A systematic review and meta-analyses. PLoS One. 2018;13(4):e0195687–e0195625. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Solmi M, Radua J, Miriam O, et al. Age at onset of mental disorders worldwide: a large-scale meta-analysis of 192 epidemiological studies. Mol Psychiatry. 2022;27:281–295. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Millan MJ, Andrieux A, Bartzokis G, et al. Altering the course of schizophrenia: progress and perspectives. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2016;15(7):485–515. - PubMed
    1. Fusar-Poli P, McGorry PD, Kane JM.. Improving outcomes of first-episode psychosis: an overview. World Psychiatry. 2017;16(3):251–265. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Jääskeläinen E, Juola P, Hirvonen N, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of recovery in schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull. 2013;39(6):1296–1306. - PMC - PubMed