The spectrum of mania

Undiagnosed Bipolar Disorder: New Syndromes and New Treatments

Recent studies have indicated that bipolar disorder is more common than previously believed. The socioeconomic and personal burdens of this illness are significant, and the lifetime risk of suicide attempts by patients with bipolar II disorder is high. It is not uncommon for patients with bipolar disorder, especially those presenting with depression, to be seen first in a primary care setting; therefore, primary care physicians need to be ready to diagnose and manage patients with these mental illnesses. The diagnosis of bipolar disorder or bipolar spectrum disorder is easily missed, or these illnesses may be misdiagnosed. A systematic and detailed initial history from the patient and a reliable family member is essential to making the correct diagnosis. The Mood Disorder Questionnaire, a validated screening instrument for bipolar disorder, may help primary care physicians make an appropriate diagnosis. Long-term management of patients with bipolar disorder should involve close liaison with a psychiatrist.

Clinical consequences of under-recognized bipolar spectrum disorder

The prevalence of bipolar disorder is higher than previously believed, especially when bipolar spectrum disorders (BSD) are taken into account, and may approach rates as high as 5%. Difficulties in diagnosing bipolar II and BSD arise from complexities associated with defining and diagnosing hypomania. Additionally, bipolar disorder and BSD are often misdiagnosed because of symptoms that overlap with other psychiatric disorders, particularly unipolar depression. Recognition of the broader spectrum of bipolar disorders and their adequate treatment is paramount because bipolar disorder exacts such a high personal and societal toll, with high rates of suicide and interpersonal problems and a substantial economic burden. Recognition can be improved with active screening, and screening tools such as the Mood Disorders Questionnaire can be easily included in the initial assessment of patients who present with depressive symptoms. Depressive episodes are common in patients who experience BSDs, and increasingly treatment approaches designed specifically for bipolar depression are being studied.

The bipolar spectrum: a clinical perspective

The relative misdiagnosis and underdiagnosis of bipolar disorder is due in part to the 'soft' symptoms of bipolarity that characterize patients with non-classical bipolar disorder. While no agreement has been reached on the term for this group of patients, the most common classification used is 'bipolar spectrum', which shifts the emphasis in diagnosis away from polarity and toward other diagnostic validators. In order to recognize and properly treat patients with bipolar disorder, clinicians should focus on careful evaluation of patients with mixed anxiety/depressive symptoms or impulsivity conditions (substance abuse, borderline personality, bulimia, and attention deficit disorder). Furthermore, in the treatment of bipolar disorder, clinicians should also recognize that antidepressants can have a negative effect on patients by increasing the likelihood of more severe rapid cycling. While antidepressants may be useful in particularly difficult cases, emphasis should be placed on mood stabilizers for treatment of the bipolar spectrum.

A new bipolar spectrum concept: a brief review

Research on the broad bipolar spectrum is dependent on the definition of hypomania. We recently proposed a new, softer syndromal definition with clinical validity. This broadens the diagnosis of bipolar II (BP-II) disorder at the expense of major depressive disorder (MDD). There is evidence for a third group of suspected BP-II manifesting major depression plus hypomanic symptoms. The two bipolar-II groups together are as prevalent as MDD. A new concept of minor bipolar disorder embracing dysthymia, minor and recurrent brief depression with hypomanic syndromes and symptoms is discussed. Some methodological pitfalls of research on drug-induced hypomania as an element of the bipolar spectrum are also summarized.

Validating 'hard' and 'soft' phenotypes within the bipolar spectrum: continuity or discontinuity?

The unitary Kraepelian concept of manic-depressive illness which incorporated attenuated forms, personal dispositions to mood instability, as well as much of the terrain of remitting depressions, may be considered by many to be too broad. On the other hand, the presently preferred unipolar-bipolar dichotomy in official nosology fails to account for the very common occurrence of clinical and subclinical conditions in the interface of major depressive disorders and bipolarity. The emerging concept of the bipolar spectrum represents a provocative working hypothesis to account for these conditions.

Factor structure of hypomania: interrelationships with cyclothymia and the soft bipolar spectrum

BACKGROUND

No systematic data exists on the phenomenology and psychometric aspects of hypomania. In this report we focus on the factor structure of hypomania and its relationships with cyclothymic temperament in unipolar (UP) and bipolar II (BP-II) spectrum (soft bipolar) patients.

METHOD

The combined sample of UP and BP-II spectrum patients (n=427) derives from the French National multi-center study (EPIDEP). The study involved training 48 psychiatrists at 15 sites in France in a protocol based on DSM-IV phenomenological criteria for major depressive disorder, hypomania, and BP-II, as well as a broadened definition of soft bipolarity. Psychometric measures included Angst's Hypomania Checklist (HCA) and Akiskal's Cyclothymic Temperament (CT) Questionnaires.

RESULTS

In the combined sample of the UP and BP-II spectrum, the factor pattern based on the HCA was characterized by the presence of one hypomanic component. In the soft bipolar group (n=191), two components were identified before and after varimax rotation. The first factor (F-1) identified hypomania with positive (driven-euphoric) features, and the second factor (F-2) hypomania with greater irritability and risk-taking. In exploratory analyses, both factors of hypomania tentatively distinguished most soft BP subtypes from UP. However, F-1 was generic across the soft spectrum, whereas F-2 was rather specific for II-1/2 (i.e., BP-II arising from CT). CT, which was found to conform to a single factor among the soft bipolar patients, was significantly correlated only with irritable risk-taking hypomania (F-2).

LIMITATION

In a study conducted in a clinical setting, psychiatrists cannot be kept blind of the data revealed in the various clinical evaluations and instruments. However, the systematic collection of all data tended to minimize biases.

CONCLUSION

EPIDEP data revealed a dual structure of hypomania with 'classic' driven-euphoric contrasted with irritable risk-taking expressions distributed differentially across the soft bipolar spectrum. Only the latter correlated significantly with cyclothymic temperament, suggesting the hypothesis that repeated brief swings into hypomania tend to destabilize soft bipolar conditions.

Validating antidepressant-associated hypomania (bipolar III): a systematic comparison with spontaneous hypomania (bipolar II)

BACKGROUND

According to DSM-IV and ICD-10, hypomania which occurs solely during antidepressant treatment does not belong to the category of bipolar II (BP-II).

METHODS

As part of the EPIDEP National Multisite French Study of 493 consecutive DSM-IV major depressive patients evaluated in at least two semi-structured interviews 1 month apart, 144 (29.2%) fulfilled the criteria for bipolar II with spontaneous hypomania (BP-II Sp), and 52 (10.5%) had hypomania associated solely with antidepressants (BP-H AA).

RESULTS

BP-II Sp group had earlier age at onset, more hypomanic episodes, and higher ratings on cyclothymic and hyperthymic temperaments, and abused alcohol more often. The two groups were indistinguishable on the hypomania checklist score (12.2+/-4.0 vs. 11.4+/-4.4, respectively, P=0.25) and on rates of familial bipolarity (14.1% vs. 11.8%, respectively, P=0.68). But BP-H AA had significantly more family history of suicide, had higher ratings on depressive temperament, with greater chronicity of depression, were more likely to be admitted to the hospital for suicidal depressions, and were more likely to have psychotic features; finally, clinicians were more likely to treat them with ECT, lithium and mood stabilizing anticonvulsants.

LIMITATION

Naturalistic study, where treatment was uncontrolled.

CONCLUSION

BP-H AA emerges as a disorder with depressive temperamental instability, manifesting hypomania later in life (and, by definition, during pharmacotherapy only). By the standards of clinicians who have taken care of these patients for long periods of time, BP-H AA appears as no less bipolar than those with prototypical BP-II. We submit that familial bipolarity ('genotypic' bipolarity) strongly favors their inclusion within the realm of bipolar II spectrum, as a prognostically less favorable depression-prone phenotype of this disorder, and which is susceptible to destabilization under antidepressant treatment. These considerations argue for revisions of DSM-IV and ICD-10 conventions. BP-HAA may represent a genetically less penetrant expression of BP-II; phenotypically; it might provisionally be categorized as bipolar III.

The soft bipolar spectrum redefined: focus on the cyclothymic, anxious-sensitive, impulse-dyscontrol, and binge-eating connection in bipolar II and related conditions

The bipolar II spectrum represents the most common phenotype of bipolarity. Numerous studies indicate that in clinical settings this soft spectrum might be as common--if not more common than--major depressive disorders. The proportion of depressive patients who can be classified as bipolar II further increases if the 4-day threshold for hypomania proposed by the DSM-IV is reconsidered. The modal duration of hypomanic episodes is 2 days; highly recurrent brief hypomania is as short as 1 day, and when complicated by major depression, it should be classified as a variant of bipolar II. Another variant of the bipolar II pattern is represented by major depressive episodes superimposed on cyclothymic or hyperthymic temperamental characteristics. The literature is unanimous in supporting the idea that depressed patients who experience hypomania during antidepressant treatment belong to the bipolar II spectrum. So-called alcohol- or substance-induced mood disorders may have much in common with bipolar II spectrum disorders, in particular when mood swings outlast detoxification. Finally, many patients within the bipolar II spectrum, especially when recurrence is high and the interepisodic period is not free of affective manifestations, may meet criteria for personality disorders. This is particularly true for cyclothymic bipolar II patients, who are often misclassified as borderline personality disorder because of their extreme mood instability. Subthreshold mood lability of a cyclothymic nature seems to be the common thread that links the soft bipolar spectrum. The authors submit this to represent the endophenotype likely to be informative in genetic investigations. Mood lability can be considered the core characteristics of the bipolar II spectrum, and it has been validated prospectively as a sensitive and specific predictor of bipolar II outcome in major depressives. In a more hypothetical vein, cyclothymic-anxious-sensitive temperamental disposition might represent the mediating underlying characteristic in the complex pattern of anxiety, mood, and impulsive disorders that bipolar II spectrum patients display throughout much of their lifetimes. The foregoing conclusions, based on clinical experience and the research literature, challenge several conventions in the formal classificatory system (i.e., ICD-10 and DSM-IV). The authors submit that the enlargement of classical bipolar II disorders to include a spectrum of conditions subsumed by a cyclothymic-anxious-sensitive disposition, with mood reactivity and interpersonal sensitivity, and ranging from mood, anxiety, impulse control, and eating disorders, will greatly enhance clinical practice and research endeavors. Prospective studies with the requisite methodologic sophistication are needed to clarify further the relationship of the putative temperamental and developmental variables to the complex syndromic patterns described herein. The authors believe that viewing these constructs as related entities with a common temperamental diathesis will make patients in this realm more accessible to pharmacologic and psychological approaches geared to their common temperamental attributes. The authors submit that the use of the term "spectrum" is distinct from a simple continuum of subthreshold and threshold cases. The underlying temperamental dimensions postulated by the authors define the disposition for soft bipolarity and its variation and dysregulation in anxious disorders and dyscontrol in appetitive, mental, and behavioral disorders, much beyond affective disorders in the narrow sense.

"Cade's disease" and beyond: misdiagnosis, antidepressant use, and a proposed definition for bipolar spectrum disorder

The diagnosis and treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) has been inconsistent and frequently misunderstood in recent years. To identify the causes of this problem and suggest possible solutions, we undertook a critical review of studies concerning the nosology of BD and the effects of antidepressant agents. Both the underdiagnosis of BD and its frequent misdiagnosis as unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) appear to be problems in patients with BD. Underdiagnosis results from clinicians' inadequate understanding of manic symptoms, from patients' impaired insight into mania, and especially from failure to involve family members or third parties in the diagnostic process. Some, but by no means all, of the underdiagnosis problem may also result from lack of agreement about the breadth of the bipolar spectrum, beyond classic type I manic-depressive illness (what Ketter has termed "Cade's Disease"). To alleviate confusion about the less classic varieties of bipolar illness, we propose a heuristic definition, "bipolar spectrum disorder." This diagnosis would give greater weight to family history and antidepressant-induced manic symptoms and would apply to non-type I or II bipolar illness, in which depressive symptom, course, and treatment response characteristics are more typical of bipolar than unipolar illness. The role of antidepressants is also controversial. Our review of the evidence leads us to conclude that there should be less emphasis on using antidepressants to treat persons with this illness.

The Mood Disorder Questionnaire: A Simple, Patient-Rated Screening Instrument for Bipolar Disorder

Bipolar disorder is frequently encountered in primary care settings, often in the form of poor response to treatment for depression. Although lifetime prevalence of bipolar I disorder is 1%, the prevalence of bipolar spectrum disorders (e.g., bipolar I, bipolar II, and cyclothymia) is much higher, especially among patients with depression. The consequences of misdiagnosis can be devastating. One way to improve recognition of bipolar spectrum disorders is to screen for them. The Mood Disorder Questionnaire is a brief, self-report screening instrument that can be used to identify patients most likely to have bipolar disorder. Once identified, and subsequently appropriately diagnosed, the lives of those with bipolar disorder may be considerably improved.

Bipolarity from ancient to modern times: conception, birth and rebirth

We review the history of bipolar disorders from the classical Greek period to DSM-IV. Perhaps the first person who described mania and melancholia as two different phenomenological states of one and the same disease was the Greek physician of the 1st century AD, Aretaeus of Cappadocia. The modern concept of bipolar disorders was born in France, with the publications of and. Emil Kraepelin, however, in 1899, unified all types of affective disorders in 'manic-depressive insanity'; in spite of some opposition, Kraepelin's unitary concept was adopted worldwide. In the 1960s, however, the rebirth of bipolar disorders took place through the publications of Jules Angst, Carlo Perris, and George Winokur, who independently showed that there exist clinical, familial and course characteristics validating the distinction between unipolar and bipolar disorders; in addition, they verified several of the corresponding opinions of the Wernicke-Kleist-Leonhard school. The concept of unipolar and bipolar disorders has further advanced in the last three decades: landmark developments include the renaissance of Kraepelin's mixed states and of Kahlbaum's and Hecker's cyclothymia and related affective temperaments, the concept of soft bipolar spectrum (Akiskal), and the distinction of schizoaffective disorders into unipolar and bipolar forms.

The bipolar spectrum and the antidepressant view of the world

Whereas much progress has been made in the diagnosis and treatment of schizophrenia and depression in recent years, bipolar disorder continues to be frequently misunderstood, leading to its inconsistent diagnosis and treatment. In this article, we seek to identify the causes of this problem and suggest possible solutions, based on a critical review of studies concerning the nosology of bipolar disorder and the effects of antidepressant agents. Bipolar disorder appears to be underdiagnosed as well as frequently misdiagnosed as unipolar major depressive disorder. Underdiagnosis can stem from patients' impaired insight into mania and failure to involve family members in the diagnostic process and also from clinicians' inadequate understanding of manic symptoms. Underdiagnosis may also reflect disagreement about the breadth of the bipolar spectrum. We therefore propose a heuristic definition of "bipolar spectrum disorder," a diagnosis that gives greater weight to family history and antidepressant-induced manic symptoms. This diagnosis would include all forms of bipolar illness that are not type I or II . The evidence also suggests that antidepressants are probably overused and mood stabilizers underused. We consequently recommend aggressive use of mood stabilizers and less emphasis on antidepressants. In summary, the state of diagnosis and treatment in bipolar disorder is suboptimal. More diagnostic attention to the criteria for mania is necessary. In addition, the current pattern of antidepressant use in bipolar disorder does not appear to be evidence-based.

Expanding the group of bipolar disorders

The concept of bipolar disorder is an ongoing process. Its roots can be found in the work of the ancient Greek physician Aretaeus of Cappadocia, who assumed that melancholia and mania are two forms of one and the same disease; he actually believed that mania was a more severe form of melancholia. Falret [Bull. Acad. Natl. Med., Paris (1851)] and Baillarger [Ann. Méd-psychol. 6 (1854) 369] from France are the fathers of the modern understanding of bipolar disorders. But the definitive distinction of bipolar from unipolar disorders occurred in 1966 by Jules Angst and Carlo Perris in Europe, and later supported by Winokur and colleagues in the United States. Schizoaffective disorders should also be dichotomized into unipolar and bipolar forms. Another extension of the group of bipolar disorders is the contemporaneous rebirth of cyclothymia, originally described in the work of Kahlbaum (1882) and Hecker (1898) [Z. Prakt. Arzte 7 (1898) 6]; the main importance of cyclothymia today is its relevance for what Akiskal [Clin. Neuropharm. 15(1) (1992) 632] considers the realm of the 'soft bipolar spectrum.' A further interesting development is the renewed research in the field of 'mixed states' which originated in the classic Handbook of Kraepelin a century ago (1899).

Re-evaluating the prevalence of and diagnostic composition within the broad clinical spectrum of bipolar disorders

Until recently it was believed that no more than 1% of the general population has bipolar disorder. Emerging transatlantic data are beginning to provide converging evidence for a higher prevalence of up to at least 5%. Manic states, even those with mood-incongruent features, as well as mixed (dysphoric) mania, are now formally included in both ICD-10 and DSM-IV. Mixed states occur in an average of 40% of bipolar patients over a lifetime; current evidence supports a broader definition of mixed states consisting of full-blown mania with two or more concomitant depressive symptoms. The largest increase in prevalence rates, however, is accounted for by 'softer' clinical expressions of bipolarity situated between the extremes of full-blown bipolar disorder where the person has at least one manic episode (bipolar I) and strictly defined unipolar major depressive disorder without personal or family history for excited periods. Bipolar II is the prototype for these intermediary conditions with major depressions and history of spontaneous hypomanic episodes; current evidence indicates that most hypomanias pursue a recurrent course and that their usual duration is 1-3 days, falling below the arbitrary 4-day cutoff required in DSM-IV. Depressions with antidepressant-associated hypomania (sometimes referred to as bipolar III) also appear, on the basis of extensive international research neglected by both ICD-10 and DSM-IV, to belong to the clinical spectrum of bipolar disorders. Broadly defined, the bipolar spectrum in studies conducted during the last decade accounts for 30-55% of all major depressions. Rapid-cycling, defined as alternation of depressive and excited (at least four per year), more often arise from a bipolar II than a bipolar I baseline; such cycling does not in the main appear to be a distinct clinical subtype - but rather a transient complication in 20% in the long-term course of bipolar disorder. Major depressions superimposed on cyclothymic oscillations represent a more severe variant of bipolar II, often mistaken for borderline or other personality disorders in the dramatic cluster. Moreover, atypical depressive features with reversed vegetative signs, anxiety states, as well as alcohol and substance abuse comorbidity, is common in these and other bipolar patients. The proper recognition of the entire clinical spectrum of bipolarity behind such 'masks' has important implications for psychiatric research and practice. Conditions which require further investigation include: (1) major depressive episodes where hyperthymic traits - lifelong hypomanic features without discrete hypomanic episodes - dominate the intermorbid or premorbid phases; and (2) depressive mixed states consisting of few hypomanic symptoms (i.e., racing thoughts, sexual arousal) during full-blown major depressive episodes - included in Kraepelin's schema of mixed states, but excluded by DSM-IV. These do not exhaust all potential diagnostic entities for possible inclusion in the clinical spectrum of bipolar disorders: the present review did not consider cyclic, seasonal, irritable-dysphoric or otherwise impulse-ridden, intermittently explosive or agitated psychiatric conditions for which the bipolar connection is less established. The concept of bipolar spectrum as used herein denotes overlapping clinical expressions, without necessarily implying underlying genetic homogeneity. In the course of the illness of the same patient, one often observes the varied manifestations described above - whether they be formal diagnostic categories or those which have remained outside the official nosology. Some form of life charting of illness with colored graphic representation of episodes, stressors, and treatments received can be used to document the uniquely varied course characteristic of each patient, thereby greatly enhancing clinical evaluation.

Delirious mania

OBJECTIVES

To define the characteristics of delirious mania.

METHODS

A list of patients exhibiting both delirium and mania admitted to an academic psychiatric treatment unit of a tertiary care medical center was maintained for 6 years. A literature review for the terms 'delirium' and 'bipolar disorder' was undertaken.

RESULTS

Few articles identify the syndrome. Most cite Bell (On a form of disease resembling some advanced stages of mania and fever. Am J Insanity 1849; 6: 97-127) as the first observer and Bond (Recognition of acute delirious mania. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1980; 37: 553 554) as the most recent. Fourteen instances were identified in the case list. Delirious mania is a syndrome of the acute onset of the excitement, grandiosity, emotional lability, delusions, and insomnia characteristic of mania, and the disorientation and altered consciousness characteristic of delirium. Almost all patients exhibited signs of catatonia. Bond (1980) recommends lithium and a neuroleptic combination as the treatment. In the present series, electroconvulsive therapy was found to be safe and rapidly effective, with all cases responding within three treatments and requiring less than six treatments in the course. The rapidity of response is the same as that of patients with catatonia.

CONCLUSION

Delirious mania warrants specific identification in the diagnostic nomenclature. The distinction between delirious mania and the excited or malignant forms of catatonia requires study.

The evolving bipolar spectrum. Prototypes I, II, III, and IV

This article argues for the necessity of a partial return to Kraepelin's broad concept of manic-depressive illness, and proposes definitions--and provides prototypical cases--to illustrate the rich clinical phenomenology of bipolar subtypes I through IV. Although considerable evidence supports such extensions of bipolarity encroaching upon the territory of major depressive disorder, further research is needed in this area. From a practice standpoint, the compelling reason for broadening the bipolar spectrum lies in the utility of mood stabilizers as augmentation or monotherapy in the treatment of major depressive disorders with soft bipolar features falling short of the current strict standards for the diagnosis of bipolar II and hypomania in DSM-IV and ICD-10.

The emerging epidemiology of hypomania and bipolar II disorder

The literature on the lifetime prevalence of the bipolar spectrum suggests rates of 3-6.5%. The Zurich cohort study identified a prevalence rate up to age 35 of 5.5% of DSM-IV hypomania/mania and a further 2.8% for brief hypomania (recurrent and lasting 1-3 days). The validity of DSM-IV hypomania and brief hypomania was demonstrated by a family history of mood disorders, a history of suicide attempts and treatment for depression. Comorbidity with anxiety disorders and substance abuse was found equally in both subtypes of hypomania. The study suggests that recurrent brief hypomania belongs to the bipolar spectrum. The findings should be verified on larger national cohorts in other epidemiological and clinical studies.

Affective disorder: the new imperium

Eugen Bleuler formulated schizophrenia as a disjunctive category based on universal, dimensional phenomena that were regarded as pathognomonic of the disorder. In consequence, schizophrenia came to dominate diagnostic practice in American psychiatry. This report suggests that affective disorder has been formulated in a similar way, and with a similar result. The nature of disjunctive categories is examined and their replacement by conjunctive categories for schizophrenia and affective disorder is anticipated.

The Zurich Study. X. Hypomania in a 28- to 30-year-old cohort

Hypomania in a 28- to 30-year-old cohort is described. Data were taken from a prospective longitudinal cohort study from the general population of Zurich, Switzerland. An estimated 1-year prevalence rate of hypomania of 4% was found. Over a period of time hypomania was associated with major depression and dysthymia. We found equal proportions of suicide attempts and equal rates of treated family members among hypomanics and depressives. Furthermore, the previous history of treatment of mild bipolars (hypomania with depression) and unipolar depressives was comparable. The sum of life events, several SCL-90R scores and the scores of distress in relationships were already elevated in hypomanics 7 years before diagnosis of hypomania, indicating an increased activity level, a generalized increase in neuroticism, and a relatively unvarying behaviour pattern in social relationships.

Appraising the quality of drug-evaluation research: I. A method of meta-analysis for acute treatment medications

The present paper focuses on drug-evaluation research, and describes a method of meta-analysis for evaluating the methodological quality of a body of research focusing on the study of an acute treatment medication. An illustrative application of this procedure to research evaluating lithium treatment for acute mania revealed general problems with diagnostic reliability and the reliability of the dependent variable, and a tendency to ignore the statistical power aspects of determining sample size. The implications of this are discussed in terms of a need to further clarify lithium's role in treating this disorder.

The concept of distinct but voluminous groups of bipolar and unipolar diseases. III. Bipolar and unipolar comparison

Comparing unipolar diseases (n = 121) as one group with bipolar diseases (n = 86) as another group (both groups including affective and schizoaffective disorders) relevant differences were found in sex distribution, age at onset, premorbid personality, long-term course and some aspects of long-term outcome. Although building two voluminous groups of "unipolar diseases" and "bipolar diseases" runs some risk of inhomogeneity, this danger could perhaps be limited by referring to the "affective subtype" and the "schizoaffective subtype".

Psychiatric genetics and psychiatric nosology

At the present time, family and twin data are used in psychiatry to test clinical concepts at issue, and, in particular, to validate or reject diagnostic classifications. The dichotomy between the schizophrenias and the effective disorders, as suggested by Kraepelin, has been supported by contemporary family and twin studies and also is corroborated by modern family and adoption studies. In the atypical psychoses it is demonstrated impressively how family data vary with different sampling procedures and diagnostic practices. In the affective disorders, the family findings at first favored the separation of unipolar and bipolar disorders but, subsequently, this concept was questioned and revised. Currently, psychiatric genetics attempts to contribute to the understanding of the affective disorders, in particular the depressions, by delineating subgroups and by looking for possible genetic relations between depression and frequently associated disorders, such as anxiety or anorexia.

Methodological guidelines for reading drug-evaluation research

The present paper discusses methodological issues in psychopharmacological research. The intention is to provide readers of drug-evaluation research with a set of basic guidelines that will assist them to critically evaluate the investigations they encounter in the psychiatric literature. This paper describes the underlying rationale and basic principles associated with applying statistical analyses to drug-evaluation research data, and also addresses 11 additional methodological issues: specification of the research sample with respect to descriptive variables, diagnostic criteria, reliability of the diagnosis, the control group, random assignment of subjects to treatment conditions, blindness, subject attrition, treatment complications and side effects, the power of statistical tests, multivariate statistical analysis, and the reliability of the dependent variable. Evidence is presented to support the premise that there is a need to read drug-evaluation research critically.

Bipolar outcome in the course of depressive illness. Phenomenologic, familial, and pharmacologic predictors

Twenty percent of a cohort of 206 outpatient depressives with no past bipolar history switched during prospective observation. These 41 probands developed manic periods on the average of 6.4 years (median 4, range 1-25) after their first depressive episode. The change in polarity occurred throughout the life span, but was most common in adolescence and early adulthood. The following variables were found useful in predicting this outcome: onset less than or equal to 25 years, bipolar family history, loaded pedigrees, precipitation by childbirth, hypersomnic-retarded phenomenology, and pharmacologically-mobilized hypomania. Although the respective sensitivities of these findings were relatively low (32-71%), their specificities ranged from 69% to 100% for bipolar outcome; the diagnostic specificity of any 3 of these variables when combined was 98%. When compared with nonbipolar depression, bipolar disorder was seldom chronologically secondary to nonaffective psychiatric disorders. These findings suggest that many young depressives with lethargy and oversleeping are not manifesting a "neurotic" disorder, but rather a precursor of primary bipolar affective disorder. Finally, a psychotically depressed adolescent or young adult with positive bipolar family history should be observed for eventual bipolar outcome, especially when the clinical presentation is that of stupor.

Reducing American diagnosis of schizophrenia: will the DSM III suffice?

At the turn of the century Kraepelin brought together the disparate syndromes of hebephrenia, dementia paranoides, and catatonia under the rubric of dementia praecox. At the same time he crystallized the concept of manic-depressive illness as an entity discrete and separate from the former syndrome. In the years since Kraepelin's classification first came to be adopted, the definitions and descriptions of these two major disorders have undergone many changes. In an attempt to comprehend the meaning and the mechanism of the psychoses, Bleuler was drawn by the emergent theories of psychoanalysis to extend Kraepelin's clinical observations into the realm of psychology. He renamed dementia praecox the schizophrenias, thus emphasizing his idea that the splitting of associative processes was a fundamental feature of the syndrome; and he added the subcategory of simple schizophrenia. American psychiatry, dominated until recently by psychoanalytic concepts, has been influenced more by Bleulerian than Kraepelinian contributions. However, it has not restricted itself to Bleulerian notions. As Kety (1980) remarked in his Maudsley Lecture, great liberties have been taken with the syndrome of schizophrenia; the essential features have been altered, primarily by an expansion of its boundaries.