Lamotrigine in the acute treatment of bipolar depression: results of five double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials

Safety and tolerability of anticonvulsant medication in bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Anticonvulsants (AC) are widely used and recommended as a treatment option in different phases of bipolar disorder (BD). In contrast to ample evidence for efficacy in acute mania, there is generally less unambiguous evidence for maintenance treatment or bipolar depression, and data on long-term tolerability in BD are sparse, although this varies greatly between different compounds. This review summarizes the clinically relevant tolerability and safety profile of ACs commonly used for the treatment of BD based on findings from randomized controlled trials (RCT).

AREAS COVERED

Systematic search of the English literature between January 1991 and May 2015 revealed a total of nine RCTs investigating valproate, five RCTs with carbamazepine and 8 with lamotrigine For these ACs we found information on side effect profiles for both acute and maintenance RCTs, albeit of varying quality, whereas for topiramate (five RCTs), gabapentin and esclicarbazepine acetate (one RCT each) only acute treatment RCTs have been published. Descriptive side effect profiles from open-label studies exist for several other ACs rarely used in BD, and are included in this review as a brief narrative chapter.

EXPERT OPINION

Whereas both valproate and carbamazepine are associated with, in part, severe adverse events, lamotrigine emerges as a relatively safe and well tolerated treatment option, especially in maintenance treatment and prevention of depressive relapse in BD. Lack of proven efficacy and side effect profile of other, less rigorously studied ACs restricts their use only to very selected BD cases.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of drug treatments for bipolar depression: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Treatment of bipolar depression is complicated by variable response and risk of switch to mania. Guidance is informed by the strength of evidence rather than by comparative data.

METHOD

We performed a multiple-treatments meta-analysis of randomised, double-blind, controlled comparisons of 4-16 weeks in adults in bipolar depression. The primary efficacy outcome was effect size. The primary acceptability outcome was 'switch to mania'. Secondary outcomes were likelihood of response and withdrawals from trials.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine studies were included (8331 participants). Olanzapine + fluoxetine and olanzapine performed best on primary outcome measure being ranked highest for effect size. Switch to mania was least likely with ziprasidone and then quetiapine. Olanzapine + fluoxetine was also ranked the highest for response with lurasidone second, but olanzapine + fluoxetine and olanzapine had the optimal effect on response and withdrawal from treatment when the two parameters were considered together. Several treatments [monoamine oxidase inhibitors (MAOIs), ziprasidone, aripiprazole and risperidone] have limited or no therapeutic activity in bipolar depression.

CONCLUSION

Olanzapine + fluoxetine should be first-line treatment. Olanzapine, quetiapine, lurasidone, valproate and selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitors are also recommended. Tricyclic antidepressants and lithium are worthy of consideration but lamotrigine (high risk of switching, less robust efficacy) and MAOIs, ziprasidone, aripiprazole and risperidone (no evidence of efficacy) should not be used.

Balancing benefits and harms of treatments for acute bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

Bipolar depression is more pervasive than mania, but has fewer evidence-based treatments.

METHODS

Using data from multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials and meta-analyses, we assessed the number needed to treat (NNT) for response and the number needed to harm (NNH) for selected side effects for older and newer acute bipolar depression treatments.

RESULTS

The 2 older FDA-approved treatments for bipolar depression, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC) and quetiapine (QTP) monotherapy, were efficacious (response NNT=4 for OFC, NNT=6 for QTP), but similarly likely to yield harms (OFC weight gain NNH=6; QTP sedation/somnolence NNH=5). Commonly used unapproved agents (lamotrigine monotherapy and adjunctive antidepressants) tended to be well-tolerated (with double-digit NNHs), although this advantage was at the cost of inadequate efficacy (response NNT=12 for lamotrigine, NNT=29 for antidepressants). In contrast, the newly approved agent lurasidone was not only efficacious (response NNT=5 for monotherapy, NNT=7 as adjunctive therapy), but also had enhanced tolerability (NNH=15 for akathisia [monotherapy], NNH=16 for nausea [adjunctive]). Although adjunctive armodafinil appeared well tolerated, its efficacy in bipolar depression has not been consistently demonstrated in randomized controlled trials.

LIMITATIONS

NNT and NNH are categorical metrics; only selected NNHs were assessed; limited generalizability of efficacy (versus effectiveness) studies.

CONCLUSION

For acute bipolar depression, older approved treatments may have utility in high-urgency situations, whereas lamotrigine and antidepressants may have utility in low-urgency situations. Newly approved lurasidone may ultimately prove useful in diverse situations. New drug development needs to focus on not only efficacy but also on tolerability.

Review of evidence for use of antidepressants in bipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

Depressive episodes predominate over the course of bipolar disorder and cause considerable functional impairment. Antidepressants are frequently prescribed in the treatment of bipolar depression, despite concerns about efficacy and risk of switching to mania. This review provides a critical examination of the evidence for and against the use of antidepressants in bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

English-language peer-reviewed literature and evidence-based guidelines published between January 1, 1980, and March 2014, were identified using PubMed, MEDLINE, PsycINFO/PsycLIT, and EMBASE. All searches contained the terms antidepressants, bipolar depression, depressive episodes in bipolar disorder, and treatment guidelines for bipolar depression. Meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, systematic reviews, and practice guidelines were included. Bibliographies from these publications were used to identify additional articles of interest.

DATA EXTRACTION

Studies involving treatment of bipolar depression with antidepressant monotherapy, adjunctive use of antidepressant with a mood stabilizer, and meta-analysis of such studies combined were reviewed.

CONCLUSIONS

The body of evidence on the use of antidepressant monotherapy to treat patients with bipolar depression is contentious, but the recommendations from evidence-based guidelines do not support antidepressant monotherapy for bipolar depression. Only when mood stabilizer or atypical antipsychotic monotherapy has failed should adjunctive treatment with an antidepressant be considered.

Effectiveness of the extended release formulation of quetiapine as monotherapy for the treatment of acute bipolar depression

Background: To evaluate the effectiveness of quetiapine extended release once daily in bipolar depression. Methods: Double-blind, placebo-controlled study in acutely depressed adults with bipolar I or II disorder, with or without rapid cycling.Patients were randomized to 8 weeks of quetiapine extended release(XR) 300 mg daily monotherapy or placebo.The primary out come measure was changed from baseline to Week 8 in MADRS total score. Results: Quetiapine XR 300 mg once daily(N=133)showed significantly greater improvement in depressive symptoms compared with placebo (N=137) from Week 1(p<0.001)through to Week 8 (p<0.001).Mean change in MADRS total score at Week 8 was 17.4 in the quetiapine XR group and -11.9 in the placebo group(p<0.001). Response (≥ 50% reduction in MADRS total score)and remission (MADRS total score ≤12)rates at Week 8 were significantly higher with quetiapine XR compared with placebo (p<0.001 and p<0.05, respectively).Quetiapine XR improved core symptoms of depression. The most common adverse events associated with quetiapine XR were dry mouth, somnolence,and sedation. Greater weight gain was observed inpatients on quetiapine XR relative to placebo. Limitations: Fewer patients with bipolar II disorder included, only one fixed dose tested and the lack of an active comparator. Conclusions: Quetiapine XR(300 mg)once daily monotherapy was significantly more effective than placebo for treating episodes of depression in bipolar I disorder, throughout the 8-week study,with significance observed as early as Day 7.Adverse events were consistent with the known effects of quetiapine.

Observational study to evaluate the clinical benefit of lamotrigine add-on therapy in bipolar patients in a naturalistic treatment setting

INTRODUCTION

The objective of the current study was to assess, in a naturalistic treatment setting, the clinical benefits of lamotrigine add-on therapy for patients with bipolar disorder.

METHODS

This was an open-label, prospective, naturalistic, 12-week, observational study that included 98 bipolar patients treated with lamotrigine add-on therapy, in addition to mood stabilizers or atypical antipsychotics for 1-4 weeks. The clinical benefits of lamotrigine augmentation were evaluated using the Clinical Global Impression-Clinical Benefit (CGI-CB) Scale, and the Clinical Global Impression of Bipolar Disorder-Severity scale was used to evaluate the severity of the patients' conditions.

RESULTS

According to paired t-test analyses, the mean CGI-CB score significantly decreased from 7.2 ± 2.7 at baseline to 3.8 ± 2.5 at Week 12. Likewise, the mean score for Clinical Global Impression of Bipolar Disorder-Severity scale significantly decreased from 4.7 ± 0.9 at baseline to 3.1 ± 1.2 at Week 12. Analysis of covariance showed that the extent to which CGI-CB scores changed from baseline to Week 12 did not significantly differ between patients with bipolar I and II disorder. However, the change in CGI-CB scores between Weeks 4 and 12 was significantly smaller in bipolar II patients than bipolar I patients. A total of 21 (21.4%) patients dropped out during the course of the study, and 30 patients (30.6%) reported 82 adverse events.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study demonstrated that the use of lamotrigine in patients with bipolar disorder, especially those whom conventional mood stabilizers or antipsychotics are insufficiently effective or intolerable, can be beneficial regardless of the type of bipolar disorder.

Ketamine administration in depressive disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Ketamine's efficacy in depressive disorders has been established in several controlled trials. The aim of the present study was to determine whether or not ketamine administration significantly improves depressive symptomatology in depression and more specifically in major depressive disorder (MDD), bipolar depression, resistant depression (non-ECT studies), and as an anesthetic agent in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) for resistant depression (ECT studies). Secondary outcomes were the duration of ketamine's effect, the efficacy on suicidal ideations, the existence of a dose effect, and the safety/tolerance of the treatment.

METHODS

Studies were included if they met the following criteria (without any language or date restriction): design: randomized controlled trials, intervention: ketamine administration, participants: diagnosis of depression, and evaluation of severity based on a validated scale. We calculated standardized mean differences (SMDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs) for each study. We used fixed and random effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic.

RESULTS

We included nine non-ECT studies in our quantitative analysis (192 patients with major depressive disorder and 34 patients with bipolar depression). Overall, depression scores were significantly decreased in the ketamine groups compared to those in the control groups (SMD = -0.99; 95 % CI -1.23, -0.75; p < 0.01). Ketamine's efficacy was confirmed in MDD (resistant to previous pharmacological treatments or not) (SMD = -0.91; 95 % CI -1.19,-0.64; p < 0.01), in bipolar depression (SMD = -1.34; 95 % CI -1.94, -0.75), and in drug-free patients as well as patients under medication. Four ECT trials (118 patients) were included in our quantitative analysis. One hundred and three patients were diagnosed with major depressive disorder and 15 with bipolar depression. Overall, depression scores were significantly improved in the 58 patients receiving ketamine in ECT anesthesia induction compared to the 60 patients (SMD = -0.56; 95 % CI -1.10, -0.02; p = 0.04; I2 = 52.4 %). The duration of ketamine's effects was assessed in only two non-ECT studies and seemed to persist for 2-3 days; this result needs to be confirmed. Three of four studies found significant decrease of suicidal thoughts and one found no difference between groups, but suicidal ideations were only studied by the suicide item of the depressive scales. It was not possible to determine a dose effect; 0.5 mg/kg was used in the majority of the studies. Some cardiovascular events were described (mostly transient blood pressure elevation that may require treatment), and ketamine's use should remain cautious in patients with a cardiovascular history.

CONCLUSION

The present meta-analysis confirms ketamine's efficacy in depressive disorders in non-ECT studies, as well as in ECT studies. The results of this first meta-analysis are encouraging, and further studies are warranted to detail efficacy in bipolar disorders and other specific depressed populations. Middle- and long-term efficacy and safety have yet to be explored. Extrapolation should be cautious: Patients included had no history of psychotic episodes and no history of alcohol or substance use disorders, which is not representative of all the depressed patients that may benefit from this therapy.

Epigenetic mechanisms in mood disorders: targeting neuroplasticity

Developing novel therapeutics and diagnostic tools based upon an understanding of neuroplasticity is critical in order to improve the treatment and ultimately the prevention of a broad range of nervous system disorders. In the case of mood disorders, such as major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BPD), where diagnoses are based solely on nosology rather than pathophysiology, there exists a clear unmet medical need to advance our understanding of the underlying molecular mechanisms and to develop fundamentally new mechanism experimental medicines with improved efficacy. In this context, recent preclinical molecular, cellular, and behavioral findings have begun to reveal the importance of epigenetic mechanisms that alter chromatin structure and dynamically regulate patterns of gene expression that may play a critical role in the pathophysiology of mood disorders. Here, we will review recent advances involving the use of animal models in combination with genetic and pharmacological probes to dissect the underlying molecular mechanisms and neurobiological consequence of targeting this chromatin-mediated neuroplasticity. We discuss evidence for the direct and indirect effects of mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and antipsychotics, among their many other effects, on chromatin-modifying enzymes and on the epigenetic state of defined genomic loci, in defined cell types and in specific regions of the brain. These data, as well as findings from patient-derived tissue, have also begun to reveal alterations of epigenetic mechanisms in the pathophysiology and treatment of mood disorders. We summarize growing evidence supporting the notion that selectively targeting chromatin-modifying complexes, including those containing histone deacetylases (HDACs), provides a means to reversibly alter the acetylation state of neuronal chromatin and beneficially impact neuronal activity-regulated gene transcription and mood-related behaviors. Looking beyond current knowledge, we discuss how high-resolution, whole-genome methodologies, such as RNA-sequencing (RNA-Seq) for transcriptome analysis and chromatin immunoprecipitation-sequencing (ChIP-Seq) for analyzing genome-wide occupancy of chromatin-associated factors, are beginning to provide an unprecedented view of both specific genomic loci as well as global properties of chromatin in the nervous system. These methodologies when applied to the characterization of model systems, including those of patient-derived induced pluripotent cell (iPSC) and induced neurons (iNs), will greatly shape our understanding of epigenetic mechanisms and the impact of genetic variation on the regulatory regions of the human genome that can affect neuroplasticity. Finally, we point out critical unanswered questions and areas where additional data are needed in order to better understand the potential to target mechanisms of chromatin-mediated neuroplasticity for novel treatments of mood and other psychiatric disorders.

Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE): a pragmatic trial of complex treatment for a complex disorder

BACKGROUND

Classic and second-generation antipsychotic mood stabilizers are recommended for treatment of bipolar disorder, yet there are no randomized comparative effectiveness studies that have examined the 'real-world' advantages and disadvantages of these medications.

PURPOSE

We describe the strategic decisions in the design of the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE). This article outlines the key issues and solutions the investigators faced in designing a clinical trial that would maximize generalizability and inform real-world clinical treatment of bipolar disorder.

METHODS

Bipolar CHOICE was a 6-month, multi-site, prospective, randomized clinical trial of outpatients with bipolar disorder. This study compares the effectiveness of quetiapine versus lithium, each with adjunctive personalized treatments (APTs). The co-primary outcomes selected are the overall benefits and harms of the study medications (as measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Efficacy Index) and the Necessary Clinical Adjustments (a measure of the number of medication changes). Secondary outcomes are continuous measures of mood, the Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Score, and the Longitudinal Interval Follow up Evaluation Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT).

RESULTS

The final study design consisted of a single-blind, randomized comparative effectiveness trial of quetiapine versus lithium, plus APT, across 10 sites. Other important study considerations included limited exclusion criteria to maximize generalizability, flexible dosing of APT medications to mimic real-world treatment, and an intent-to-treat analysis plan. In all, 482 participants were randomized to the study, and 364 completed the study.

LIMITATIONS

The potential limitations of the study include the heterogeneity of APT, selection of study medications, lack of a placebo-control group, and participants' ability to pay for study medications.

CONCLUSION

We expect that this study will inform our understanding of the benefits and harms of lithium, a classic mood stabilizer, compared to quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic with broad-spectrum activity in bipolar disorder, and will provide an example of a well-designed and well-conducted randomized comparative effectiveness clinical trial.

The presentation, recognition and management of bipolar depression in primary care

Bipolar disorder is a mood disorder characterized by episodes of major depression and mania or hypomania. Most patients experience chronic symptoms of bipolar disorder approximately half of the time, most commonly subsyndromal depressive symptoms or a full depressive episode with concurrent manic symptoms. Consequently, patients with bipolar depression are often misdiagnosed with major depressive disorder. Individual patient characteristics and population screening tools may be helpful in improving recognition of bipolar depression in primary care. Health risk behaviors including tobacco use, sedentary activity level and weight gain are highly prevalent in patients with bipolar disorder, as are the comorbid chronic diseases such as diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease. Patients with bipolar illness have about an eight-fold higher risk of suicide and a two-fold increased risk of death from chronic medical illnesses. Recognition of bipolar depression and its associated health risk behaviors and chronic medical problems can lead to the use of appropriate interventions for patients with bipolar disorder, which differ in important ways from the treatments used for major depressive disorder. The above topics are reviewed in detail in this article.

Lamotrigine in binge-eating disorder associated with bipolar II depression and treatment-resistant type 2 diabetes mellitus: a case report

BACKGROUND

Lamotrigine (LMG) is an anticonvulsant currently registered for the treatment of bipolar disorder (BP) depression. We report the case of a 61-year-old woman with comorbid binge-eating disorder (BED), BP depression, and treatment-resistant type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), in which LMG showed significant efficacy against BED and BP depression and resulted in a drastic decrease in plasma glucose levels.

CASE REPORT

The patient had had untreated BP depression, BED, and T2DM for more than 30 years. We prescribed LMG at 25 mg/d for BP depression and titrated it up to 50 mg/d over 4 weeks, then maintained this dose for the next 16 weeks. At follow-up after the first 4-week period, she reported a significant decrease in compulsive eating impulses and depressive mood, and her positive reports were consistent in the following months. Hemoglobin A1c levels at National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program decreased drastically from 9.6% to 7.1% over the 20 weeks after initiating treatment.

CONCLUSION

This case suggests that LMG might be beneficial for BED with concomitant BP depression, and potentially for treatment-resistant T2DM, if this refractoriness is identified to result from comorbidity of BED and BP.

Valproate as a risk factor for lamotrigine discontinuation

BACKGROUND

Although lamotrigine may be useful for treating bipolar depressive patients, some lamotrigine-associated adverse effects may prevent the continuation of treatment. The purpose of the present study was to identify risk factors for lamotrigine discontinuation after adjustment for several potential interactive factors.

METHODS

We examined tolerability in those who discontinued lamotrigine within 2 months of treatment and those who maintained lamotrigine for more than 2 months. Groups were examined separately because 6-8 weeks are necessary to titrate dose and drug eruptions can often occur within 2 months of treatment commencement.

RESULTS

Multiple regression analysis revealed that valproate combination was positively and significantly associated with lamotrigine discontinuation after adjustment for other factors.

LIMITATIONS

The limitations of the present study were retrospective observation and a relatively small number of subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings reconfirm that lamotrigine and valproate combination treatment may prevent the continuation of lamotrigine in some patients.

Treatment of bipolar depression

Depressive symptoms and episodes dominate the long-term course of bipolar disorder and are associated with high levels of disability and an increased risk of suicide. However, the treatment of bipolar depression has been poorly investigated in comparison with that of manic episodes and unipolar major depressive disorder. The goal of treatment in bipolar depression is not only to achieve full remission of acute symptoms, but also to avoid long-term mood destabilization and to prevent relapses. A depressive presentation of bipolar disorder may often delay the appropriate management and, thus, worsen the long-term outcome. In these cases, an accurate screening for diagnostic indicators of a possible bipolar course of the illness should guide the therapeutic choices, and lead to prognostic improvement. Antidepressant use is still the most controversial issue in the treatment of bipolar depression. Despite inconclusive evidence of efficacy and tolerability, this class of agents is commonly prescribed in acute and long-term treatment, often in combination with mood stabilizers. In this article, we review available treatment options for bipolar depression, and we shall provide some suggestions for the management of the different presentations of depression in the course of bipolar disorder.

Overview of antidepressant treatment of bipolar depression

Bipolar depression remains a major unresolved challenge for psychiatric therapeutics. It is associated with significant disability and mortality and represents the major proportion of the approximately half of follow-up time spent in morbid states despite use of available treatments. Evidence regarding effectiveness of standard treatments, particularly with antidepressants, remains limited and inconsistent. We reviewed available clinical and research literature concerning treatment with antidepressants in bipolar depression and its comparison with unipolar depression. Research evidence concerning efficacy and safety of commonly used antidepressant treatments for acute bipolar depression is very limited. Nevertheless, an updated meta-analysis indicated that overall efficacy was significantly greater with antidepressants than with placebo-treatment and not less than was found in trials for unipolar major depression. Moreover, risks of non-spontaneous mood-switching specifically associated with antidepressant treatment are less than appears to be widely believed. The findings encourage additional efforts to test antidepressants adequately in bipolar depression, and to consider options for depression in types I vs. II bipolar disorder, depression with subsyndromal hypomania and optimal treatment of mixed agitated-dysphoric states--both short- and long-term. Many therapeutic trials considered were small, varied in design, often involved co-treatments, or lacked adequate controls.

A systematic review of the evidence for the treatment of acute depression in bipolar I disorder

In this article, we examined evidence for the acute treatment of depression in bipolar I disorder, focusing on double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with a definite primary outcome measure and published in peer review journals. Quetiapine and olanzapine/fluoxetine are currently approved by the FDA for the treatment of bipolar depression, and a number of additional agents (including other atypical antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and novel compounds) have been studied with varying degrees of efficacy. The medication with the most evidence for efficacy in bipolar depression is quetiapine, with five studies showing positive efficacy compared to placebo. In contrast, five studies of lamotrigine were negative, although meta-analyses of the pooled have found some treatment effects. Two studies of olanzapine and olanzapine/fluoxetine and three small studies of divalproex showed significant efficacy in treating bipolar depression. Two studies of aripiprazole found no differences compared to placebo. Early research on lithium in bipolar depression had significant methodological flaws, and only one study of lithium met our primary search criteria. To better understand the role of antidepressants, we also examined studies of antidepressants as adjunctive treatment of bipolar depression in participants taking mood stabilizers or atypical antipsychotics. These studies reported mixed results for a variety of antidepressants, but the majority found no differences compared to placebo. Other studies of adjunctive treatment were also discussed. There has been one positive adjunctive study each of lamotrigine, omega-3 fatty acids, modafinil, and armodafinil, while there was one negative trial each of omega-3 fatty acids, ziprasidone, and levetiracetam.

Quetiapine monotherapy in bipolar II depression: combined data from four large, randomized studies

BACKGROUND

Despite being present in up to 1% of the population, few controlled trials have examined the efficacy of treatments for bipolar II depression. Pooled data are presented from four placebo-controlled studies (BOLDER I [5077US/0049] and II [D1447C00135]; EMBOLDEN I [D1447C00001] and II [D1447C00134]) that evaluated the efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy for depressive episodes in patients with bipolar II disorder.

METHODS

All studies included an 8-week, double-blind treatment phase in which patients were randomly assigned to treatment with quetiapine 300 mg/day, quetiapine 600 mg/day, or placebo. Outcome measures included the change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 8, effect sizes, and MADRS response and remission rates.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Improvements in mean MADRS total scores from baseline to week 8 were significantly greater with quetiapine 300 and 600 mg/day (-15.58 [n = 283] and -14.88 [n = 289]; p < 0.001) compared with placebo (-11.61 [n = 204]). The MADRS effect sizes were 0.44 for quetiapine 300 mg/day and 0.47 for 600 mg/day (p < 0.001 vs placebo). Significantly higher proportions of patients receiving quetiapine, at both doses, than placebo-treated patients achieved response and remission at week 8 (p < 0.01). Common adverse events associated with quetiapine (both doses) included dry mouth, somnolence, sedation, dizziness, and headache. Rates of mania and hypomania were similar for quetiapine and placebo. Quetiapine monotherapy demonstrated significant efficacy compared with placebo and was generally well tolerated in the treatment of bipolar II depression.

Guideline for treatment of bipolar disorder by the Japanese Society of Mood Disorders, 2012

The Japanese Society of Mood Disorders established a committee for treatment guidelines of mood disorders, which created the first edition of a treatment guideline for bipolar disorders on 10 March 2011. The committee has now created a second edition, which we report here. In creating this treatment guideline, the first step was to have several bipolar disorder specialists review well-conducted studies and meta-analyses. Based on this evidence, and with a consensus among the specialists, treatment procedures that were considered optimal were compiled and the strength of recommendation for each treatment method was determined. The first draft, prepared in this manner, was further revised through a process of critical investigation by all committee members to produce the final edition.

Methodological differences between pharmacological treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder: what to do for the clinicians?

OBJECTIVE

Numerous guidelines for bipolar disorder have been published. The aim of this article is to underline the main differences between consensus-based guidelines (CBG) and evidence-based guidelines (EBG) currently available for the management of bipolar disorder.

METHODS

A literature search for guidelines published since 2006 was performed. A qualitative analysis was then conducted to compare the methodologies and the guidelines contents.

RESULTS

Comparison between CBG and EBG found more similarities than differences. However, discordances were found in the first-line choice of treatment (monotherapy or combination, use of lamotrigine or lithium in bipolar depression), time to reassessment and duration of maintenance treatment, introduction as from the acute phase a regimen compatible with long-term use and pharmacotherapy during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

The choice of policy, whatever the methodology used, is up to the authors and can, therefore, depend on their interpretation of the available scientific evidence. Combining both methodologies (CBG and EBG) enables us to meet the complete definition of evidence-based medicine.

A systematic review on the role of anticonvulsants in the treatment of acute bipolar depression

Despite the high morbidity and mortality associated with bipolar depression, the optimal treatment for this phase is still a matter of debate. The aim of the current review was to provide updated evidence about the efficacy and tolerability of anticonvulsants in the treatment of acute bipolar depression. A comprehensive review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the use of anticonvulsants for the treatment of acute bipolar depression up to June 2011 was conducted by means of the PubMed-Medline database. Eligibility criteria included active comparator-controlled or placebo-controlled randomized studies involving monotherapy or combination therapy. A total of 18 RCTs fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Studies supported the efficacy of divalproex as monotherapy in acute bipolar depression but small sample size was a common methodological limitation. Findings were inconclusive for lamotrigine and carbamazepine although overall lamotrigine may have a beneficial but modest effect. Negative results were found for levetiracetam and gabapentin but the evidence base on these agents is scant. All anticonvulsants were generally well tolerated. No double-blind RCTs were found for the use of other anticonvulsants such as oxcarbazepine, licarbazepine, zonisamide, retigabine, pregabalin, tiagabine, felbamate and vigabatrine in the acute treatment of bipolar depression. To sum up, taking into consideration the efficacy and tolerability profiles of anticonvulsants, current evidence supports the use of divalproex and lamotrigine in the treatment of acute bipolar depression. However, available data for most other anticonvulsants are inconclusive and further RCTs with larger sample sizes are needed before drawing firm conclusions.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2013

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments published guidelines for the management of bipolar disorder in 2005, with updates in 2007 and 2009. This third update, in conjunction with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders, reviews new evidence and is designed to be used in conjunction with the previous publications.The recommendations for the management of acute mania remain largely unchanged. Lithium, valproate, and several atypical antipsychotic agents continue to be first-line treatments for acute mania. Monotherapy with asenapine, paliperidone extended release (ER), and divalproex ER, as well as adjunctive asenapine, have been added as first-line options.For the management of bipolar depression, lithium, lamotrigine, and quetiapine monotherapy, as well as olanzapine plus selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), and lithium or divalproex plus SSRI/bupropion remain first-line options. Lurasidone monotherapy and the combination of lurasidone or lamotrigine plus lithium or divalproex have been added as a second-line options. Ziprasidone alone or as adjunctive therapy, and adjunctive levetiracetam have been added as not-recommended options for the treatment of bipolar depression. Lithium, lamotrigine, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, risperidone long-acting injection, and adjunctive ziprasidone continue to be first-line options for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. Asenapine alone or as adjunctive therapy have been added as third-line options.

Algorithm-driven pharmacological management of bipolar disorder in Connecticut prisons

The objective of this study was to assess adaptation of the Texas Implementation of Medication Algorithm (TIMA) for bipolar disorder (BD) in the Connecticut Department of Correction. A nonrandomized sample of 20 males and 20 females, with diagnoses of BD Type I or II, was enrolled in the study. Two TIMA-trained psychiatrists treated the participants over a 12-week period following the TIMA protocol. The primary outcome measure was the Bipolar Disorder Symptom Scale. Secondary outcome measures evaluated global clinical status, comorbid symptomatology, and quality of life. Significant improvement was seen with the primary and secondary outcome measures (p < .001). Subanalyses showed differences in outcomes based on gender and whether a manic or depression algorithm was used. Antidepressant and antipsychotic medication use decreased, with increase in anticonvulsant and anxiolytic medication usage. This pilot study confirmed the effectiveness and benefits of TIMA for BD adaptation in the correctional setting.

A critical review of the recent literature and selected therapy guidelines since 2006 on the use of lamotrigine in bipolar disorder

The anticonvulsant drug lamotrigine (LTG), a sodium channel blocker and inhibitor of glutamate release, has been found to have antidepressant effects in the treatment of bipolar disorder. It is recommended by certain therapy guidelines as a first-line agent for acute and maintenance therapy in bipolar depression, but there have been only some promising results of placebo-controlled trials on its acute antidepressant effects, and the recommendation in therapy guidelines has been reconsidered. On the contrary, positive results for maintenance therapy could be confirmed, and LTG is still a well-tolerated option, especially in patients with predominant depressive episodes. Antimanic effects are not shown in the literature, and its use is not advised in any guidelines that were examined. In conclusion, the findings of the present review article on treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder question the role of LTG in acute depressive states, and critically discusses its use, particularly in acute depressive states.

Clinical factors leading to lamotrigine prescription in bipolar outpatients: subanalysis of the SIN-DEPRES study

BACKGROUND

The use of lamotrigine is a point of discrepancy among the diverse guidelines published on the management of bipolar disorder (BD). Evidence supporting the long-term efficacy is reasonably robust. Nonetheless, the effectiveness of lamotrigine in acute treatment is vigorously debated and it is unclear how this drug is used in routine clinical practice. This subanalysis of the SIN-DEPRES study was designed to understand the clinical profile of bipolar patients receiving lamotrigine.

METHODS

In this prospective national multicenter study, 652 patients with clinically stable bipolar I and II disorder were recruited. Clinical assessments included sociodemographic and clinical data, the Modified Clinical Global Impression scale for BD (CGI-BP-M), the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), and prescriptions of psychotropic medications and their doses.

RESULTS

By means of a logistic regression model, an association between receiving treatment with lamotrigine and the following clinical variables was found: number of past depressive episodes (O.R.=2.875, 95% CI: 1.203-6.869, p=0.018), depressive polarity of the most recent episode (O.R.=1.945, 95% CI: 1.267-2.985, p=0.002), severity in CGI-BD-M depression (O.R.=1.850, 95% CI: 1.215-2.817, p=0.004), bipolar II disorder diagnosis (O.R.=1.635, 95% CI: 1.078-2.482, p=0.021) and number of episodes per year (O.R.=1.310, 95% CI: 1.069-1.605, p=0.009).

LIMITATIONS

Subanalysis of the SIN-DEPRES study with a cross-sectional design.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of lamotrigine in clinical practice is in accordance with most of the guidelines, which support its use in patients with depressive predominant polarity and bipolar II disorder.

An update on antidepressant use in bipolar depression

The effective treatment of depression in people with bipolar disorder remains a clinical challenge. The role of antidepressant medication in treating bipolar depression has been controversial. While early studies and meta-analyses supported a role for antidepressant medication, more recent, high quality randomized controlled trials in bipolar depression have generally not demonstrated efficacy for antidepressant medications. Although the risk of affective switch and long-term de-stabilization remains a concern when using antidepressant medications in bipolar disorder, the magnitude of this risk has been difficult to ascertain with confidence. Maintenance use of antidepressant medication has generally not demonstrated a favorable risk-benefit ratio. Future studies should explore the patient characteristics and response patterns that predict a more favorable response profile to antidepressants amongst patients with bipolar disorder so that the medications can be rationally used in those who are most likely to benefit.

Lamotrigine vs. lamotrigine plus divalproex in randomized, placebo-controlled maintenance treatment for bipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

To compare the maintenance efficacy of lamotrigine (Lam) to combination therapy of Lam+divalproex ER (Div) in recently depressed patients with bipolar disorder (BD).

METHOD

We randomized 86 BD I or II patients in a major depressive episode to 8 months of double-blind treatment with Lam+placebo or Lam+Div. To be eligible for randomization, patients had to achieve control of both depressive and manic symptoms during an open phase that included both Lam and Div.

RESULTS

Time to depressive episode did not differ significantly by Kaplan-Maier survival analysis (χ2=1.82, df=1, P=0.18). However, several secondary outcomes did show significant differences. The proportion of Lam+placebo patients who had at least one Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score≥15 during the maintenance phase was 67% (30/45) compared with 44% (18/41) for the Lam+Div group (χ2=4.51, P=0.03). Among BD I patients assigned to Lam+placebo, 71.4% (25/35) had at least one visit with MADRS score≥15 compared with 36.7% (11/30) among Lam+Div patients (χ2=7.89, df=1, P=0.005).

CONCLUSION

Lam+Div generally provided greater maintenance efficacy than Lam alone for depressive indices in recently depressed BD patients.

Lamotrigine as add-on treatment to lithium and divalproex: lessons learned from a double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in rapid-cycling bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

A substantial portion of the morbidity associated with rapid-cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD) stems from refractory depression. This study assessed the antidepressant effects of lamotrigine as compared with placebo when used as add-on therapy for rapid-cycling bipolar depression non-responsive to the combination of lithium plus divalproex.

METHODS

During Phase 1 of this trial, hypomanic, manic, mixed, and/or depressed outpatients (n = 133) aged 18-65 years with DSM-IV RCBD type I or II were initially treated with the open combination of lithium and divalproex for up to 16 weeks. During Phase 2, subjects who did not meet the criteria for stabilization (n = 49) (i.e., remained in or cycled into the depressed phase) were randomly assigned to double-blind, adjunctive lamotrigine (n = 23) or adjunctive placebo (n = 26). The primary endpoint was the mean change in depression symptom severity from the beginning of Phase 2 to the end of Phase 2 (week 12) on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Data were analyzed by analysis of covariance with last observation carried forward and a mixed-models analysis.

RESULTS

  During Phase 1, a high rate of study discontinuations occurred due to intolerable side effects (13/133; 10%) and study non-adherence (22/133; 17%). Only 14% (19/133) stabilized on the open combination of lithium and divalproex. Among the 49 (37%) patients randomized to the double-blind adjunctive treatment phase, mean ± standard error change from baseline on the MADRS total score was -8.5 ± 1.7 points for lamotrigine and -9.1 ± 1.5 points for placebo (p = not significant; mixed-models analysis). No significant differences were observed in the rates of response, remission, or bimodal response between lamotrigine and placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

The poor tolerability, lack of efficacy, and high rate of early discontinuation with the combination of lithium and divalproex suggests this regimen was ineffective for the majority of patients with RCBD. Among patients who did not stabilize on lithium and divalproex, the addition of lamotrigine was no more effective than placebo in reducing depression severity. The findings suggest an opportunity for several design modifications to enhance signal detection in future trials of RCBD. The main limitation is the small number of subjects randomized to double-blind treatment.

Add-on Lamotrigine Treatment for Subsyndromal Depression after Manic or Mixed States in Bipolar Disorder Improved the Quality of Life

Two cases of patients experienced subsyndromal depression after manic or mixed hypomanic and depressive episodes due to bipolar I (case 1) and II (case 2) disorders prior to the use of lamotrigine. Case 1 showed episodes of mood switching induced by antidepressants and seasonal mood instability. Case 2 showed hippocampal atrophy and a persistent dull headache that preceded the use of lamotrigine. Both were successfully treated with add-on lamotrigine therapy, and the dull headache was effectively treated with olanzapine. Both patients improved in social activity and work performance after these add-on treatments. Thus, add-on treatment with lamotrigine alone or in combination with olanzapine was an effective strategy to improve the quality of life in bipolar depression. Subsyndromal depression that present after the disappearance of the manic or mixed state was suggested to be practical indication for the use of lamotrigine.

Mono- and combination drug therapies in hospitalized patients with bipolar depression. Data from the European drug surveillance program AMSP

BACKGROUND

For the pharmacological treatment of bipolar depression several guidelines exist. It is largely unknown, to what extent the prescriptions in daily clinical routine correspond to these evidence based recommendations and which combinations of psychotropic drugs are frequently used.

METHODS

The prescriptions of psychotropic drugs were investigated of all in-patients with bipolar depression (n = 2246; time period 1994-2009) from hospitals participating in the drug surveillance program AMSP. For the drug use in 2010, 221 cases were analysed additionally.

RESULTS

From 1994 to 2009, 85% of all patients received more than one class of psychotropic substances: 74% received antidepressants in combination therapy, 55% antipsychotics, 48% anticonvulsants and 33% lithium. When given in combination, lithium is the most often prescribed substance for bipolar depression (33%), followed by valproic acid (23%), mirtazapine and venlafaxine (16% each), quetiapine (15%), lamotrigine (14%) and olanzapine (13%). Both, lithium and valproic acid are often combined with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRI), but also with mirtazapine und venlafaxine. Combinations of more than one antidepressant occur quite often, whereby combinations with bupropion, paroxetine, fluoxetine or fluvoxamine are very rare. In 2010, quetiapine (alone and combined) was the most frequently prescribed drug (39%); aripiprazole was administered in 10%.

CONCLUSION

Combinations of antidepressants (SSRI, mirtazapine, venlafaxine) with mood stabilizers (lithium, valproic acid, lamotrigine) and / or atypical antipsychotics (quetiapine, olanzapine) are common. Of most of those combinations the efficacy has not been studied. The use of aripiprazole and the concomitant use of two or three antidepressants contrast the guidelines.

Effects of the anticonvulsant lacosamide compared to valproate and lamotrigine on cocaine-enhanced reward in rats

Some drugs developed as anticonvulsants (notably, valproate and lamotrigine) have therapeutic effects in bipolar and related disorders. Lacosamide, a recently approved anticonvulsant, has unique effects on sodium channels that may play a role in producing the mood-stabilizing effects of anticonvulsant drugs. We tested whether lacosamide would have effects similar to or different from valproate and lamotrigine in a model of reward and elevated mood. The intracranial self-stimulation (ICSS) test is sensitive to the function of brain reward systems. Changes in ICSS may model aspects of disorders characterized by abnormalities of reward and motivation. Cocaine elevates mood, and reduction of cocaine-induced facilitation of ICSS has been used to predict antimanic-like or mood stabilizing effects of drugs. We tested lacosamide, lamotrigine, and valproate in the rat ICSS test alone or in the presence of cocaine. A high dose of lacosamide (30 mg/kg) significantly elevated ICSS thresholds, indicating that it reduced the rewarding impact of medial forebrain bundle stimulation. Lower doses (3-10 mg/kg) did not alter ICSS, but blocked the cocaine-induced lowering of ICSS thresholds. The highest doses of valproate (300 mg/kg) and lamotrigine (30 mg/kg) also elevated ICSS thresholds, and only these high doses significantly lowered cocaine-induced effects. Of the drugs tested, only lacosamide significantly attenuated the reward-facilitating effects of cocaine at doses that had no effects on ICSS response in the absence of cocaine. Abnormalities of mood and reward are common in psychiatric disorders, and these results suggest that lacosamide deserves further study in models of these disorders.

Efficacy of pharmacotherapy in bipolar disorder: a report by the WPA section on pharmacopsychiatry

The current statement is a systematic review of the available data concerning the efficacy of medication treatment of bipolar disorder (BP). A systematic MEDLINE search was made concerning the treatment of BP (RCTs) with the names of treatment options as keywords. The search was updated on 10 March 2012. The literature suggests that lithium, first and second generation antipsychotics and valproate and carbamazepine are efficacious in the treatment of acute mania. Quetiapine and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination are also efficacious for treating bipolar depression. Antidepressants should only be used in combination with an antimanic agent, because they can induce switching to mania/hypomania/mixed states/rapid cycling when utilized as monotherapy. Lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine and aripiprazole are efficacious during the maintenance phase. Lamotrigine is efficacious in the prevention of depression, and it remains to be clarified whether it is also efficacious for mania. There is some evidence on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions as an adjunctive treatment to medication. Electroconvulsive therapy is an option for refractory patients. In acute manic patients who are partial responders to lithium/valproate/carbamazepine, adding an antipsychotic is a reasonable choice. The combination with best data in acute bipolar depression is lithium plus lamotrigine. Patients stabilized on combination treatment might do worse if shifted to monotherapy during maintenance, and patients could benefit with add-on treatment with olanzapine, valproate, an antidepressant, or lamotrigine, depending on the index acute phase. A variety of treatment options for BP are available today, but still unmet needs are huge. Combination therapy may improve the treatment outcome but it also carries more side-effect burden. Further research is necessary as well as the development of better guidelines and algorithms for the step-by-step rational treatment.

The clinical management of bipolar disorder complexity using a stratified model

OBJECTIVE

To provide practical and clinically meaningful treatment recommendations that amalgamate clinical and research considerations for several common, and as yet understudied, bipolar disorder complex presentations, within the framework of a proposed stratified model.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken using electronic database search engines (Medline, PubMed, Web of Science) using key words (e.g., bipolar disorder, anxiety, rapid cycling, and subsyndromal). All relevant randomised controlled trials were examined, in addition to review papers, meta-analyses, and book chapters known to the authors. The findings formed the basis of the treatment recommendations within this paper.

RESULTS

In light of the many broad presentations of bipolar disorder, a stratified model of bipolar disorder complexity was developed to facilitate consideration of the myriad of complexities that can occur during the longitudinal course of illness and the appropriate selection of treatment. Evidence-based treatment recommendations are provided for the following bipolar disorder presentations: bipolar II disorder, subsyndromal symptoms, mixed states, rapid cycling, comorbid anxiety, comorbid substance abuse, and for the following special populations: young, elderly, and bipolar disorder around the time of pregnancy and birth. In addition, some key strategies for countering treatment non-response and alternative medication recommendations are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment recommendations for the more challenging presentations of bipolar disorder have historically received less attention, despite their prevalence. This review acknowledges the weaknesses in the current evidence base on which treatment recommendations are generally formulated, and additionally emphasises the need for high-quality research in this area. The stratified model provides a means for conceptualizing the complexity of many bipolar disorder presentations and considering their management.

Pharmacotherapeutic trends in 2231 psychiatric inpatients with bipolar depression from the International AMSP Project between 1994 and 2009

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological treatment of bipolar depression is a complex and controversial issue, and its real-world practice remains largely unknown.

METHOD

Observational analysis of the pharmacotherapy of 2231 psychiatric inpatients with a current episode of bipolar depression. The study was based on cross-sectional prescription data from European psychiatric hospitals that had been repeatedly collected between 1994 and 2009 through the collaborative Drug Safety in Psychiatry (AMSP) program.

RESULTS

Overall 81.3% of patients received antidepressants (AD) (7.8% monotherapy), 57.9% antipsychotics (AP), 50.1% anticonvulsants (AC), 47.5% tranquilizers, and 34.6% lithium (Li). Use over time was stable for AD, decreased for Li, and increased for AC, AP and tranquilizers. Pronounced increases were specifically observed for quetiapine, lamotrigine and valproate. Use of tricyclic AD decreased but its prevalence was still 11.8% in 2009. Venlafaxine was used by 19.5% in 2009. We also observed an increase of polypharmacy combining AD, AP, AC and Li. From 2006 to 2009 37.0% received concomitant treatment with three, and 6.4% even with all four of those drug classes.

LIMITATIONS

Observational cross-sectional study without follow-up or additional clinical information.

CONCLUSIONS

Monotherapy with antidepressants and any use of tricyclic AD and venlafaxine still has a considerable prevalence in bipolar depression, but this is controversial due to the reported risk of treatment emergent affective switches. Triple and quadruple therapy is not evidence-based but increasingly used in clinical practice. This may reflect an attempt to overcome treatment failure, and further studies should evaluate efficacy and safety of this common practice.

[The pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder: a systematic and critical review of the methodological aspects of modern clinical trials]

OBJECTIVE

To review systematically the main clinical trials on the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder and to make a critical analysis of their methodological aspects.

METHOD

A search in Medline, ISI and PsycINFO databases was conducted, using the following search terms: "bipolar", "randomized", "placebo" e "controlled". Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trials on the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder were selected. Besides, according to our criteria, samples had to consist of at least 100 patients and experimental drug had to be used as monotherapy.

RESULTS

34 articles met our selection criteria. All drugs currently indicated for mania, bipolar depression and maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder were more effective than placebo in at least one clinical trial. However, these studies had highly selected samples, high dropout rates and low response rates.

CONCLUSION

Modern clinical trials on pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder have important methodological limitations. So, their results should be taken with caution.

The PSD-95/nNOS complex: new drugs for depression?

Drug treatment of major depressive disorder is currently limited to the use of agents which influence monoaminergic neuronal transmission including inhibitors of presynaptic transporters and monoamine oxidase. Typically improvement in depressive symptoms only emerges after several weeks of treatment, suggesting that downstream neuronal adaptations rather than the elevation in synaptic monoamine levels are responsible for antidepressant effects. In recent years, the NMDA receptor has emerged as a promising target for treating CNS disorders including stroke, pain and depression. In this review, we outline the molecular mechanisms underlying NMDA receptor signalling in neurons and in particular provide an overview of the role of the NMDAR/PSD-95/nNOS complex in CNS disorders. We discuss novel drug developments made that suggest the NMDAR/PSD-95/nNOS complex as a potential target for the treatment of depression. The review also provides examples of how PDZ-based protein-protein interactions can be exploited as novel drug targets for disease.

General and comparative efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants in the acute treatment of depressive disorders: a report by the WPA section of pharmacopsychiatry

Current gold standard approaches to the treatment of depression include pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic interventions with social support. Due to current controversies concerning the efficacy of antidepressants in randomized controlled trials, the generalizability of study findings to wider clinical practice and the increasing importance of socioeconomic considerations, it seems timely to address the uncertainty of concerned patients and relatives, and their treating psychiatrists and general practitioners. We therefore discuss both the efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants in the treatment of depressive disorders. We explain and clarify useful measures for assessing clinically meaningful antidepressant treatment effects and the types of studies that are useful for addressing uncertainties. This includes considerations of methodological issues in randomized controlled studies, meta-analyses, and effectiveness studies. Furthermore, we summarize the differential efficacy and effectiveness of antidepressants with distinct pharmacodynamic properties, and differences between studies using antidepressants and/or psychotherapy. We also address the differential effectiveness of antidepressant drugs with differing modes of action and in varying subtypes of depressive disorder. After highlighting the clinical usefulness of treatment algorithms and the divergent biological, psychological, and clinical efforts to predict the effectiveness of antidepressant treatments, we conclude that the spectrum of different antidepressant treatments has broadened over the last few decades. The efficacy and clinical effectiveness of antidepressants is statistically significant, clinically relevant, and proven repeatedly. Further optimization of treatment can be helped by clearly structured treatment algorithms and the implementation of psychotherapeutic interventions. Modern individualized antidepressant treatment is in most cases a well-tolerated and efficacious approach to minimize the negative impact of otherwise potentially devastating and life-threatening outcomes in depressive disorders.

Genetic approaches to a better understanding of bipolar disorder

Bipolar disorder is a disease which causes major disability. The disease has both a manic and depressive component. Current standard of care consists of atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of mania, antidepressants for the treatment of depression, and mood stabilizers for the maintenance of euthymia. The molecular mechanisms which cause the disease are not well understood. Genome wide association studies have provided a set of genes which are linked to the disease. These genes show linkage to physiological and neuroanatomical alterations which are also seen in bipolar disorder.

Lamotrigine: when and where does it act in affective disorders? A systematic review

Recent published data and treatment guidelines have created uncertainty about the use of lamotrigine in affective disorders, especially in acute bipolar depression. Furthermore, unpublished data on lamotrigine in mania, mixed episodes, unipolar depression and rapid cycling are still waiting to be integrated into the literature. Therefore, we critically reviewed the position of lamotrigine in the acute and long-term treatment of affective disorders. Studies were identified by searching English language articles published in MEDLINE using the key words: lamotrigine, bipolar depression, unipolar depression, mania, mixed episode, long-term treatment, rapid-cycling. Results of unpublished trials were obtained from the GlaxoSmithKline website. Lamotrigine showed efficacy in the prophylaxis of bipolar disorder, more so in depressive than manic episodes. There was no evidence of effectiveness in the acute treatment of mania, mixed episodes, unipolar depression or rapid-cycling bipolar I disorder. Its effect in the acute treatment of bipolar depression is at most small. Based on current evidence, lamotrigine is indicated for the prophylaxis of bipolar disorder with predominantly depressive episodes. Its effectiveness in the acute treatment of bipolar depression is open to debate, and practical considerations limit its usefulness here. There are no grounds for recommending its use in manic or mixed states, in rapidly-cycling bipolar I or in unipolar depression.

Bipolar depression: clinically missed, pharmacologically mismanaged

Bipolar affective disorders are common and frequently debilitating mental illnesses. Diagnostic criteria mean they are defined by the presence of pathological mood elevation, but research shows greater disease burden is inflicted by depressive phases (bipolar depression) both in terms of duration and impact of symptoms. Despite this there is consistent evidence for the underdiagnosis of bipolar depression and its misdiagnosis as a unipolar disorder, with significant subsequent impact on medication management. There is currently less robust evidence for the appropriate pharmacological approach in such individuals than in unipolar depression, and fewer guidelines for clinicians. Despite this there is clear and growing evidence that 'treatment as usual' of depressive symptomatology is ineffective at best, harmful at worst, and that there is little role for the use of antidepressants. Both mood stabilizers and antipsychotics demonstrate efficacy, and whilst there are emerging data on intraclass differences, more research is needed, particularly concerning bipolar II disorder. Present treatment strategies are limited by insufficient large randomized control trials, an inadequate understanding of the neuropathology of bipolar illnesses and a lack of tailored medications. Better clinical training, understanding and recognition of this common condition are essential.

The contextual fear conditioning deficit presented by spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) is not improved by mood stabilizers

OBJECTIVES

We have recently reported that spontaneously hypertensive rats (SHR) present a contextual fear conditioning (CFC) deficit. This deficit is improved by antipsychotic drugs, potentiated by proschizophrenia manipulations and not altered by acute administration of carbamazepine, lamotrigine and valproic acid. Nevertheless, the effects of lithium-a classical mood stabilizer-or repeated treatment with these drugs were not evaluated. The main aim of the present study was to extend our previous work by investigating a possible beneficial effect of acute and/or chronic treatments with lithium or lamotrigine on the acquisition deficit of CFC presented by SHR.

METHODS

Rats were submitted to CFC task after an acute treatment with lithium and/or a repeated treatment with lithium and lamotrigine.

RESULTS

Our data revealed that the CFC deficit presented by SHR is not improved by acute or repeated treatment with lithium. Repeated lamotrigine treatment potentiated the deficit presented by SHR and impaired CFC in control animals (Wistar Rats).

CONCLUSIONS

These data reinforce the absence of beneficial effects of mood stabilizers on the emotional context processing impairment modeled by SHR.

State of the art: treatment of bipolar disorders

Bipolar disorders are lifelong lasting affective disorders, with an episodic course of the illness in most cases. The lifetime prevalence is around 2-5%, the illness usually appears in early adulthood and causes significant impairment in psychosocial functioning. This is a selective review focusing on recent developments and issues of interest in the psychopharmacological treatment of bipolar disorders. It is based primarily on the results of adequately powered, randomised, controlled trials (RCTs). These studies were systematically retrieved by means of a Medline search. The past 10 years have led to a broadening of the psychopharmacological treatment options for bipolar disorders. The proof of efficacy for the combination of fluoxetine/olanzapine as well as quetiapine in the acute treatment of bipolar I depression were important steps. While lithium remains the gold standard in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders, valproate, olanzapine, lamotrigine, aripiprazole, and quetiapine have been shown efficacious for this indication, with quetiapine possessing the broadest approval status of all drugs for the different treatment phases of this illness. Despite this progress there remains a huge demand regarding new compounds for nearly every area in the psychopharmacological treatment of bipolar disorders. In addition new methodological approaches regarding the proof of effectiveness in clinical practice are urgently needed.

Pharmacotherapeutics of epilepsy: use of lamotrigine and expectations for lamotrigine extended release

The goal in managing patients with epilepsy is complete seizure freedom. Pharmacotherapeutic management of epilepsy is complicated by multiple syndromes, inter-individual differences in drug sensitivities, inter-individual differences in drug disposition, and drug interactions. Most anti-epileptic drugs (AEDs) have a therapeutic window with only a 2- to 3-fold concentration range. Extended release formulations offer advantages over their immediate release counter parts with less fluctuation in the serum concentration vs time curve and improved compliance. However, missed doses are more likely to result in prolonged “sub-therapeutic serum concentrations”. Best clinical outcome may sometimes require twice daily dosing of extended release formulations even though approved for once daily dosing, as this optimally balances pharmacokinetics against compliance. Lamotrigine (LTG) is a broad spectrum AED with efficacy in partial and generalized epilepsy syndromes and good tolerability. Its metabolism is affected by co-medications which may be inducing, neutral or inhibiting of hepatic glucuronidation. Furthermore, though the average half-life in monotherapy is about 24 hours, there is a large inter-individual variation that may, including the extremes, approach a range of 10-fold. LTG-XR is expected to decrease fluctuation of serum concentration in the presence of hepatic inducing or neutral drugs. However, optimal clinical benefit in some patients may require twice daily dosing when metabolism is rapid.

A critical appraisal of treatments for bipolar disorder

Recovery-the absence of all abnormal mood symptoms-is the goal of treatment for bipolar disorder. Unfortunately, a minority of people suffering from bipolar disorder achieve sustained recovery. Improving recovery rates for this population will require clinicians in the primary care setting to be familiar with appropriate treatments for acute bipolar mania and depression and for the maintenance phase. Efficacy and tolerability of pharmacotherapeutic and psychotherapeutic options for all phases of treatment and each type of mood episode are discussed. Primary care physicians are encouraged to avoid prescribing antidepressant monotherapy for any patient with depression and a history of mania or hypomania.

Treating bipolar depression - antidepressants and alternatives: a critical review of the literature

OBJECTIVE

Although depressive symptoms are preponderant in the course of bipolar (BP) disorders, the treatment of BP depression remains a controversial issue with different clinical approaches available. This review addresses the issues of whether antidepressants (ADs) are effective in treating acute and long-term BP depression, risks linked to ADs and what alternatives to ADs are available.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE databases using the following syntax: [bipolar depression AND unipolar depression AND (antidepressants OR anticonvulsants OR lithium OR antipsychotics OR dopamine-agonists OR psychoeducation OR psychotherapy OR electroconvulsive therapy OR transcranial magnetic stimulation)]. The search included studies published up to 31 May 2009 and conducted on adults.

RESULTS

In the acute treatment of BP depression ADs are effective with no differences among drug classes. However, neither the switch into (hypo)mania induction rate nor the suicide risk linked to AD use are definitely established. The effectiveness of long-term AD use is limited to highly selected samples of patients with positive acute response. The risk of long-term ADs causing cycle acceleration and rapid cycling induction concerns a subpopulation of patients. Valid alternatives to ADs in treating acute BP depression are quetiapine, an olanzapine-fluoxetine combination, and electroconvulsive therapy for more severe patients. Lamotrigine is effective and safe in preventing depressive relapses. Psychotherapy and psychoeducation represent effective adjunctive treatments.

CONCLUSION

In the treatment of BP depression there is not a specific effective treatment for all the patients. Interventions should therefore be personalised and the scientific evidence should be adapted to each patient's clinical features.

Multisite, open-label, prospective trial of lamotrigine for geriatric bipolar depression: a preliminary report

AIMS

This is a multisite, 12-week, open-label trial of lamotrigine augmentation in 57 older adults (≥ 60 years; mean ± SD age = 66.5 ± 6.7 years) with either type I or type II bipolar depression.

METHODS

Primary outcome measure was change from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Secondary outcome measures included Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar version (CGI-BP), and the WHO-Disability Assessment Schedule II (WHO-DAS II). The Udvalg for Kliniske Undersøgelser (UKU) was used to assess side effects.

RESULTS

A total of 77.2% of the study subjects had bipolar I disorder. The mean (SD) lamotrigine dose was 150.9 (68.5) mg/day. There was significant improvement in the MADRS, HAM-D, CGI-BP, and in most domains on the WHO-DAS II. For patients for whom final MADRS score was available: 31 (57.4%) met remission criteria and 35 (64.8%) met response criteria. There were 19/57 (33.3%) who dropped out of the study prematurely, with 6 dropouts due to adverse events (4 cases of rash, 1 manic switch, and 1 hyponatremia). Two cases of rash were possibly drug related and were resolved with drug discontinuation. The most common UKU adverse effects were reduced sleep duration (n = 14, 24.6%), weight loss (n = 12, 21.1%), increased dream activity (n = 12, 21.1%), polyuria/polydipsia (n = 11, 19.3%), weight gain (n = 9, 15.8%), diminished sexual desire (n = 9, 15.8%), increased sleep (n = 9, 15.8%), lassitude/fatigue (n = 8, 14%), and unsteady gait (n = 8, 14%). No significant changes in electrocardiogram or laboratory tests were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

In bipolar depressed elders, lamotrigine was associated with improvement in depression, psychopathology, and functional status. There was a moderate number of adverse events, although relationship of adverse events (particularly falls) to study medication could not be clearly determined in this uncontrolled trial. Controlled studies are needed to further evaluate efficacy and tolerability of lamotrigine therapy in geriatric bipolar depression.

Antiepileptic drugs in the treatment of psychiatric disorders

The clinical interface between psychiatry and neurology is epilepsy; the pharmacological expression of this interface is antiepileptic drugs (AEDs), as they are used to treat both epilepsy and psychiatric disorders, especially bipolar disorders. The prevalence of psychiatric comorbidity and the risk of suicidal behavior/ideation/suicide are markedly increased in patients with epilepsy (PWE). Though AEDs receive initial indications for the treatment of epilepsy, currently the majority of AEDs are used to treat pain and psychiatric disorders. Thus in selecting the appropriate AEDs for treatment of PWE, consideration should be given to which AEDs best treat the epileptic disorder and the psychiatric comorbidity. This review is an overview of 21 AEDs in which negative psychotropic properties, approved indications in psychiatry, off-label studied uses in psychiatry, and principal uses in psychiatry are presented with literature review. A total of 40 psychiatric uses have been identified. Of the 21 AEDs reviewed, only 5 have U.S. Food and Drug Administration and/or European Medicines Agency psychiatric approval for limited uses; the majority of AEDs are used off-label. Many of these off-label uses are based on case reports, open-label studies, and poorly controlled or small-sample-size studies. In some instances, off-label use persists in the face of negative pivotal trials. Further placebo-controlled (augmentation and monotherapy) parallel-arm research with active comparators is required in the complex field of AED treatment of psychiatric disorders to minimize the treatment gap not only for PWE with psychiatric disorders, but also for psychiatric patients who would benefit from properly studied AEDs while minimizing adverse effects.