Peripheral inflammatory markers, including serum interleukin 6 (IL-6), are associated with depression, but less is known about how these markers associate with depression at different stages of the life course.

We examined the associations between serum IL-6 levels at baseline and subsequent depression symptom trajectories in two longitudinal cohorts: ALSPAC (age 10–28 years; N = 4,835) and UK Biobank (39–86 years; N = 39,613) using multilevel growth curve modeling. Models were adjusted for sex, BMI, and socioeconomic factors. Depressive symptoms were measured using the Short Moods and Feelings Questionnaire in ALSPAC (max time points = 11) and the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 in UK Biobank (max time points = 8).

Higher baseline IL-6 was associated with worse depression symptom trajectories in both cohorts (largest effect size: 0.046 [ALSPAC, age 16 years]). These associations were stronger in the younger ALSPAC cohort, where additionally higher IL-6 levels at age 9 years was associated with worse depression symptoms trajectories in females compared to males. Weaker sex differences were observed in the older cohort, UK Biobank. However, statistically significant associations (pFDR <0.05) were of smaller effect sizes, typical of large cohort studies.

These findings suggest that systemic inflammation may influence the severity and course of depressive symptoms across the life course, which is apparent regardless of age and differences in measures and number of time points between these large, population-based cohorts.

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) reduce relapses in schizophrenia; however, most healthcare professionals (HCPs) reserve LAIs for nonadherence to oral antipsychotics (OAs) or severe disease.

US HCPs were surveyed regarding attitudes and perceptions toward LAIs for schizophrenia and LAI selection preferences. Respondents were grouped by LAI use (high [≥31% of patients using LAIs], low [≤14% using LAIs]; mid not analyzed) and archetype based on response to, “Which of the following best fits the current way you view your use of [LAIs] for your patients with schizophrenia?” (see responses below).

Respondents (106 high, 130 low LAI use) were distributed across early LAI use (n=123), severity-reserved (n=88), adherence-reserved (n=113), and LAI-hesitant (n=56) archetypes.

Across all groups, HCPs estimated OA nonadherence in their practice (21%– 32%) to be lower than for patients nationwide (50%– 56%). Overall, 27% were dissatisfied with their LAI:OA use ratio, most thinking their OA use was too high. In all groups, side effects/tolerability was ranked as most important when choosing an LAI and “preference for the molecule” was ranked least important. Overall, 71%– 77% of HCPs were somewhat/much more likely to use a particular LAI based on multiple injection site options, small/on par needle, and price, and 63%– 82% of HCPs were somewhat/much more likely to select an LAI dosed once monthly or less often compared with an LAI dosed once every 2 weeks (8%). HCPs with high LAI use or early LAI use archetype were more likely to disagree that managing patients with schizophrenia increased their stress (64% and 63% vs 27%-45%, P<.05 each) and/or left them feeling “burned out” (77% and 79% vs 50%– 64%, P<.05 each).

Compared with other groups, greater proportions with high LAI use or early LAI use archetype consistently read new LAI publications (18% and 19% vs 0%– 5%, P<.01) and were confident in key aspects of LAI treatment (ie, dosing, managing side effects, access; 67%– 74% and 59%– 70% vs 11%– 57%, P<.05 each).

HCPs with low LAI use estimated the proportion of patients who initially refuse LAIs to be higher (mean, 55%) than those with low LAI use (44%, P<.01); there were no differences among archetypes (49%– 54%). HCPs with high LAI use or early LAI use archetype were more likely to “use any means necessary to ensure that a patient is on an LAI” vs other groups (44% and 51% vs 5%– 22%, P<.01 each) or had used guardianship to assist with treatment (70% and 69% vs 32%– 56%, P<.05 each); greater proportions with high LAI use or early LAI use archetype strongly agreed it was “worth [their] time to resolve issues with the insurance company” (42% and 45% vs 16%– 30%, P<.05 each) and were confident they would be able to do so (23% and 20% vs 2%– 11%, P<.05 each). Greater proportions of HCPs with early LAI use archetype vs the severity-reserved archetype strongly agreed that they attempt to determine the patient’s/caregiver’s preferred role before involving them (43% vs 27%, P<.05) and encourage them to participate (72% vs 57%, P<.05) in shared decision-making.

Comparing HCPs with high LAI use or early LAI use archetype vs other groups, multiple factors (eg, attitudes, preferences, training, knowledge base) combine to influence LAI use. These results highlight considerations for developing educational materials to increase LAI use in this population.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) face unique challenges when managing patients with schizophrenia. Educational initiatives targeting common clinical dilemmas encountered by clinicians, including partial or nonadherence, may alleviate knowledge gaps and clarify the role of long-acting injectable antipsychotic agents (LAIs) in treating this population.

4 experts in schizophrenia management used empirical evidence to identify 11 key clinical dilemmas where LAIs may be useful. These experts then developed a heuristic, educational tool (S.C.O.P.E.™: Schizophrenia Clinical Outcome Scenarios and Patient-Provider Engagement) based on empirical evidence and expert opinion for clinicians to use when encountering similar scenarios to optimize schizophrenia care.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is a freely-available resource comprising an interactive digital platform providing educational materials for HCPs involved in continued care for patients with schizophrenia. S.C.O.P.E.™ provides HCPs with considerations in common clinical scenarios met in inpatient and outpatient settings, as well as questions to consider when patients present to the emergency department. The potential usefulness of LAIs is explored in each scenario. Clinical education videos prepare nurse practitioners, social workers, and case managers to address patient concerns and communicate the benefits of LAI treatment. S.C.O.P.E.™ will not replace clinical judgment, guidelines, or continuing medical education, and is not a platform for recording patient-level data, nor intended for payer negotiations or access-related questions by HCPs.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is an educational tool for HCPs to use alongside standard psychiatric evaluations to improve understanding of how to manage common clinical dilemmas when treating patients with schizophrenia and the role of LAIs in schizophrenia management.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.

Healthcare professionals (HCPs) face unique challenges when managing patients with schizophrenia. Educational initiatives targeting common clinical dilemmas encountered by clinicians, such as unfamiliarity with prescribing information for long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs), may assist clinicians when treating patients with schizophrenia.

Four experts in schizophrenia management used empirical evidence to identify 11 key clinical dilemmas where LAIs may be useful. These experts then developed a heuristic, educational tool (S.C.O.P.E.™: Schizophrenia Clinical Outcome Scenarios and Patient-Provider Engagement) based on empirical evidence and expert opinion for clinicians to use when encountering similar scenarios to optimize schizophrenia care. S.C.O.P.E.™ also includes supportive elements such as an LAI selector.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is a freely available resource comprising an interactive digital platform providing educational materials for HCPs involved in continued care for patients with schizophrenia. To acquaint HCPs with characteristics of common LAIs used in schizophrenia treatment, S.C.O.P.E.™ offers a selector that filters LAIs by approved indication(s), initiation regimen, reconstitution, dosing strengths and frequency, injection volumes and routes, and supply and storage information based on approved product labels. The LAI selector does not provide LAI safety and efficacy data, so HCPs should visit individual product websites for this information. Therefore, S.C.O.P.E.™ will not replace clinical judgment, guidelines, or continuing medical education, and is not a platform for recording patient-level data, nor intended for payer negotiations or access-related questions by HCPs.

S.C.O.P.E.™ is an educational tool for HCPs to use alongside standard psychiatric evaluations to improve understanding of how to manage common clinical dilemmas when treating patients with schizophrenia, the role of LAIs in schizophrenia management, and the product characteristics of available LAIs.

Teva Branded Pharmaceutical Products R&D, Inc.

The brain can be represented as a network, with nodes as brain regions and edges as region-to-region connections. Nodes with the most connections (hubs) are central to efficient brain function. Current findings on structural differences in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) identified using network approaches remain inconsistent, potentially due to small sample sizes. It is still uncertain at what level of the connectome hierarchy differences may exist, and whether they are concentrated in hubs, disrupting fundamental brain connectivity.

We utilized two large cohorts, UK Biobank (UKB, N = 5104) and Generation Scotland (GS, N = 725), to investigate MDD case–control differences in brain network properties. Network analysis was done across four hierarchical levels: (1) global, (2) tier (nodes grouped into four tiers based on degree) and rich club (between-hub connections), (3) nodal, and (4) connection.

In UKB, reductions in network efficiency were observed in MDD cases globally (d = −0.076, pFDR = 0.033), across all tiers (d = −0.069 to −0.079, pFDR = 0.020), and in hubs (d = −0.080 to −0.113, pFDR = 0.013–0.035). No differences in rich club organization and region-to-region connections were identified. The effect sizes and direction for these associations were generally consistent in GS, albeit not significant in our lower-N replication sample.

Our results suggest that the brain's fundamental rich club structure is similar in MDD cases and controls, but subtle topological differences exist across the brain. Consistent with recent large-scale neuroimaging findings, our findings offer a connectomic perspective on a similar scale and support the idea that minimal differences exist between MDD cases and controls.