For DSM – 5, the American Psychiatric Association Board of Trustees established a robust vetting and review process that included two review committees that did not exist in the development of prior DSMs, the Scientific Review Committee (SRC) and the Clinical and Public Health Committee (CPHC). The CPHC was created as a body that could independently review the clinical and public health merits of various proposals that would fall outside of the strictly defined scientific process.

This article describes the principles and issues which led to the creation of the CPHC, the composition and vetting of the committee, and the processes developed by the committee – including the use of external reviewers.

Outcomes of some of the more involved CPHC deliberations, specifically, decisions concerning elements of diagnoses for major depressive disorder, autism spectrum disorder, catatonia, and substance use disorders, are described. The Committee's extensive reviews and its recommendations regarding Personality Disorders are also discussed.

On the basis of our experiences, the CPHC membership unanimously believes that external review processes to evaluate and respond to Work Group proposals is essential for future DSM efforts. The Committee also recommends that separate SRC and CPHC committees be appointed to assess proposals for scientific merit and for clinical and public health utility and impact.

Major depressive disorder (MDD) is associated with increased allostatic load (AL; a measure of physiological costs of repeated/chronic stress-responding) and metabolic dysregulation (MetD; a measure of metabolic health and precursor to many medical illnesses). Though AL and MetD are associated with poor somatic health outcomes, little is known regarding their relationship with antidepressant-treatment outcomes.

We determined pre-treatment AL and MetD in 67 healthy controls and 34 unmedicated, medically healthy MDD subjects. Following this, MDD subjects completed 8-weeks of open-label selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) antidepressant treatment and were categorized as ‘Responders’ (⩾50% improvement in depression severity ratings) or ‘Non-responders’ (<50% improvement). Logistic and linear regressions were performed to determine if pre-treatment AL or MetD scores predicted SSRI-response. Secondary analyses examined cross-sectional differences between MDD and control groups.

Pre-treatment AL and MetD scores significantly predicted continuous antidepressant response (i.e. absolute decreases in depression severity ratings) (p = 0.012 and 0.014, respectively), as well as post-treatment status as a Responder or Non-responder (p = 0.022 and 0.040, respectively), such that higher pre-treatment AL and MetD were associated with poorer SSRI-treatment outcomes. Pre-treatment AL and MetD of Responders were similar to Controls, while those of Non-responders were significantly higher than both Responders (p = 0.025 and 0.033, respectively) and Controls (p = 0.039 and 0.001, respectively).

These preliminary findings suggest that indices of metabolic and hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal-axis dysregulation are associated with poorer SSRI-treatment response. To our knowledge, this is the first study to demonstrate that these markers of medical disease risk also predict poorer antidepressant outcomes.

Disturbed sleep and activity are prominent features of bipolar disorder type I (BP-I). However, the relationship of sleep and activity characteristics to brain structure and behavior in euthymic BP-I patients and their non-BP-I relatives is unknown. Additionally, underlying genetic relationships between these traits have not been investigated.

Relationships between sleep and activity phenotypes, assessed using actigraphy, with structural neuroimaging (brain) and cognitive and temperament (behavior) phenotypes were investigated in 558 euthymic individuals from multi-generational pedigrees including at least one member with BP-I. Genetic correlations between actigraphy-brain and actigraphy-behavior associations were assessed, and bivariate linkage analysis was conducted for trait pairs with evidence of shared genetic influences.

More physical activity and longer awake time were significantly associated with increased brain volumes and cortical thickness, better performance on neurocognitive measures of long-term memory and executive function, and less extreme scores on measures of temperament (impulsivity, cyclothymia). These associations did not differ between BP-I patients and their non-BP-I relatives. For nine activity-brain or activity-behavior pairs there was evidence for shared genetic influence (genetic correlations); of these pairs, a suggestive bivariate quantitative trait locus on chromosome 7 for wake duration and verbal working memory was identified.

Our findings indicate that increased physical activity and more adequate sleep are associated with increased brain size, better cognitive function and more stable temperament in BP-I patients and their non-BP-I relatives. Additionally, we found evidence for pleiotropy of several actigraphy-behavior and actigraphy-brain phenotypes, suggesting a shared genetic basis for these traits.