Canalization and plasticity in psychopathology.

This theoretical article revives a classical bridging construct, canalization, to describe a new model of a general factor of psychopathology. To achieve this, we have distinguished between two types of plasticity, an early one that we call 'TEMP' for 'Temperature or Entropy Mediated Plasticity', and another, we call 'canalization', which is close to Hebbian plasticity. These two forms of plasticity can be most easily distinguished by their relationship to 'precision' or inverse variance; TEMP relates to increased model variance or decreased precision, whereas the opposite is true for canalization. TEMP also subsumes increased learning rate, (Ising) temperature and entropy. Dictionary definitions of 'plasticity' describe it as the property of being easily shaped or molded; TEMP is the better match for this. Importantly, we propose that 'pathological' phenotypes develop via mechanisms of canalization or increased model precision, as a defensive response to adversity and associated distress or dysphoria. Our model states that canalization entrenches in psychopathology, narrowing the phenotypic state-space as the agent develops expertise in their pathology. We suggest that TEMP - combined with gently guiding psychological support - can counter canalization. We address questions of whether and when canalization is adaptive versus maladaptive, furnish our model with references to basic and human neuroscience, and offer concrete experiments and measures to test its main hypotheses and implications. This article is part of the Special Issue on "National Institutes of Health Psilocybin Research Speaker Series".

Psilocybin with psychological support for treatment-resistant depression: six-month follow-up.

RATIONALE: Recent clinical trials are reporting marked improvements in mental health outcomes with psychedelic drug-assisted psychotherapy. OBJECTIVES: Here, we report on safety and efficacy outcomes for up to 6 months in an open-label trial of psilocybin for treatment-resistant depression. METHODS: Twenty patients (six females) with (mostly) severe, unipolar, treatment-resistant major depression received two oral doses of psilocybin (10 and 25 mg, 7 days apart) in a supportive setting. Depressive symptoms were assessed from 1 week to 6 months post-treatment, with the self-rated QIDS-SR16 as the primary outcome measure. RESULTS: Treatment was generally well tolerated. Relative to baseline, marked reductions in depressive symptoms were observed for the first 5 weeks post-treatment (Cohen's d = 2.2 at week 1 and 2.3 at week 5, both p < 0.001); nine and four patients met the criteria for response and remission at week 5. Results remained positive at 3 and 6 months (Cohen's d = 1.5 and 1.4, respectively, both p < 0.001). No patients sought conventional antidepressant treatment within 5 weeks of psilocybin. Reductions in depressive symptoms at 5 weeks were predicted by the quality of the acute psychedelic experience. CONCLUSIONS: Although limited conclusions can be drawn about treatment efficacy from open-label trials, tolerability was good, effect sizes large and symptom improvements appeared rapidly after just two psilocybin treatment sessions and remained significant 6 months post-treatment in a treatment-resistant cohort. Psilocybin represents a promising paradigm for unresponsive depression that warrants further research in double-blind randomised control trials.