Pharmacological interventions for borderline personality disorder

Treating depression in patients with borderline personality disorder: clinical clues on the use of antidepressants

Personality disorders (PD) are described as enduring patterns of markedly deviant and pervasive inner experiences and behaviors, with onset in adolescence, which lead to severe distress or impairment. Patients suffering from major depressive disorder (MDD) display higher rates of comorbidity with personality disorders, often complicating the treatment, and worsening the outcomes. Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is the most common of PD and is frequently associated with MDD, with which shares several features. The most part of research agrees on the fact that comorbid BPD in MDD patients quite doubles the poor response to treatments. Moreover, no treatment strategy stands out currently to emerge as more effective in these cases, thus urging the call for the need of new approaches. Herein, we revise the current literature on BPD, its neurobiology and comorbidity with MDD, as well as the more recent treatment strategies used. Then, based on its pharmacology, we propose a possible role of trazodone as a valuable tool to approach comorbid BPD-MDD.

Efficacy and Safety of Aripiprazole in Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review

Aripiprazole is an atypical antipsychotic medication, and its use in treating borderline personality disorder (BPD) is debatable because it is not FDA-approved for treating BPD. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of aripiprazole in patients with BPD. On July 2, 2021, the protocol (CRD42021256647) was registered in PROSPERO. PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, Ovid-Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, and Cochrane (CENTRAL) were searched without regard for language or publication date. We also searched trial registries on ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. Randomized clinical trials with adult patients diagnosed with BPD met the inclusion criteria. The Cochrane risk of bias for randomized trials (RoB-2) method was used to assess the quality of the included studies. We included two previously published randomized clinical trials. There were 76 patients with BPD, with 38, 12, and 26 assigned to the aripiprazole, olanzapine, and placebo groups, respectively. Most patients (88.16%) were females, with ages ranging from 22.1 to 28.14 yr. Aripiprazole has been proven to reduce anxiety, depression, anger, hostility, clinical severity, and obsessive-compulsive behavior, insecurity, melancholy, anxiety, aggressiveness/hostility, phobic anxiety, paranoid thinking, psychoticism, and somatization. The adverse effects were headache, insomnia, restlessness, tremor, and akathisia. The risk of bias was considerable in both trials, which is somewhat problematic considering that prejudice can lead to incorrect outcomes and conclusions. Aripiprazole has demonstrated encouraging outcomes in the treatment of patients with BPD. More randomized controlled studies are needed.

A systematic review of the role of clozapine for severe borderline personality disorder

RATIONALE

Clozapine is a unique medication with a potential role in the treatment of severe borderline personality disorder (BPD).

OBJECTIVES

The review examines the effectiveness of clozapine as a medication for management for severe BPD with high risk of suicide, violence or imprisonment, and aims to help guide clinical practice in managing severe BPD.

METHODS

A database search of the terms "Clozapine" AND "BPD"; "Antipsychotics" AND "BPD"; "Clozapine" AND "Borderline Personality Disorder"; and "Antipsychotics" AND "Borderline Personality Disorder" were performed in CINAHL, Cochrane Library, Embase, Medline, PsychINFO, PubMed, and Web of Science. Full-text articles of clinical clozapine use for BPD were included for review.

RESULTS

A total of 24 articles consisting of 1 randomised control trial, 10 non-controlled trials, and 13 case reports were identified. Most of the studies reported benefits from clozapine when used for severe BPD. Many of the studies focused on clozapine use in BPD patients at high risk of suicide. Results from these non-controlled and case reports support the use of clozapine in patients with severe BPD at high risk of suicide.

CONCLUSION

There may be a role for clozapine in treating severe treatment refractory BPD, especially for those patients at high risk of suicide and frequent hospitalisations.

Prison-based democratic therapeutic communities, medication, and the power to exclude

In 1962, the first custodial Democratic Therapeutic Community (DTC) was established in the English prison estate at HMP Grendon. Today, the Category B male prison estate in England and Wales has three DTCs and three 'TC+' units for prisoners with learning disabilities. There is one DTC in the female estate at HMP Send. The services fall under the remit of the Offender Personality Disorder Pathway, a jointly commissioned initiative that aims to provide a pathway of psychologically informed services for a highly complex and challenging group of prisoners who are likely to have a severe personality disorder. Several of these units make clear that prisoners prescribed psychotropic medicines are specifically excluded from entry and participation in the available therapy. This analysis paper explores whether an evidence-based rationale exists for this practice and examines the impact on those whose care pathways may comprise hospitals and prisons.

Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Among people with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) who are engaged in clinical care, prescription rates of psychotropic medications are high, despite the fact that medication use is off-label as a treatment for BPD. Nevertheless, people with BPD often receive several psychotropic drugs at a time for sustained periods.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological treatment for people with BPD.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 14 other databases and four trials registers up to February 2022. We contacted researchers working in the field to ask for additional data from published and unpublished trials, and handsearched relevant journals. We did not restrict the search by year of publication, language or type of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatment to placebo, other pharmacologic treatments or a combination of pharmacologic treatments in people of all ages with a formal diagnosis of BPD. The primary outcomes were BPD symptom severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes, and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were individual BPD symptoms, depression, attrition and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed data analysis using Review Manager 5 and quantified the statistical reliability of the data using Trial Sequential Analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 46 randomised controlled trials (2769 participants) in this review, 45 of which were eligible for quantitative analysis and comprised 2752 participants with BPD in total. This is 18 more trials than the 2010 review on this topic. Participants were predominantly female except for one trial that included men only. The mean age ranged from 16.2 to 39.7 years across the included trials. Twenty-nine different types of medications compared to placebo or other medications were included in the analyses. Seventeen trials were funded or partially funded by the pharmaceutical industry, 10 were funded by universities or research foundations, eight received no funding, and 11 had unclear funding. For all reported effect sizes, negative effect estimates indicate beneficial effects by active medication. Compared with placebo, no difference in effects were observed on any of the primary outcomes at the end of treatment for any medication. Compared with placebo, medication may have little to no effect on BPD symptom severity, although the evidence is of very low certainty (antipsychotics: SMD -0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.45 to 0.08; 8 trials, 951 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.65 to 1.18; 2 trials, 87 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.57; 4 trials, 265 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on self-harm, indicating little to no effect (antipsychotics: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.84; 2 trials, 76 participants; antidepressants: MD 0.45 points on the Overt Aggression Scale-Modified-Self-Injury item (0-5 points), 95% CI -10.55 to 11.45; 1 trial, 20 participants; mood stabilisers: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.48; 1 trial, 276 participants). The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on suicide-related outcomes, with little to no effect (antipsychotics: SMD 0.05, 95 % CI -0.18 to 0.29; 7 trials, 854 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.62 to 1.09; 2 trials, 45 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.36, 95% CI -1.96 to 1.25; 2 trials, 44 participants). Very low-certainty evidence shows little to no difference between medication and placebo on psychosocial functioning (antipsychotics: SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.00; 7 trials, 904 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.06; 4 trials, 161 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.26; 2 trials, 214 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests that antipsychotics may slightly reduce interpersonal problems (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.08; 8 trials, 907 participants), and that mood stabilisers may result in a reduction in this outcome (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.02; 4 trials, 300 participants). Antidepressants may have little to no effect on interpersonal problems, but the corresponding evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.55; 2 trials, 119 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about dropout rates compared with placebo by antipsychotics (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.38; 13 trials, 1216 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference in dropout rates between antidepressants (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 6 trials, 289 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15; 9 trials, 530 participants), compared to placebo. Reporting on adverse events was poor and mostly non-standardised. The available evidence on non-serious adverse events was of very low certainty for antipsychotics (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.29; 5 trials, 814 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; 1 trial, 276 participants). For antidepressants, no data on adverse events were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review included 18 more trials than the 2010 version, so larger meta-analyses with more statistical power were feasible. We found mostly very low-certainty evidence that medication may result in no difference in any primary outcome. The rest of the secondary outcomes were inconclusive. Very limited data were available for serious adverse events. The review supports the continued understanding that no pharmacological therapy seems effective in specifically treating BPD pathology. More research is needed to understand the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms of BPD better. Also, more trials including comorbidities such as trauma-related disorders, major depression, substance use disorders, or eating disorders are needed. Additionally, more focus should be put on male and adolescent samples.

Crisis interventions for adults with borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

People diagnosed with borderline personality disorder (BPD) frequently present to healthcare services in crisis, often with suicidal thoughts or actions. Despite this, little is known about what constitutes effective management of acute crises in this population and what type of interventions are helpful at times of crisis. In this review, we will examine the efficacy of crisis interventions, defined as an immediate response by one or more individuals to the acute distress experienced by another individual, designed to ensure safety and recovery and lasting no longer than one month. This review is an update of a previous Cochrane Review examining the evidence for the effects of crisis interventions in adults diagnosed with BPD.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of crisis interventions in adults diagnosed with BPD in any setting.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, nine other databases and three trials registers up to January 2022. We also checked reference lists, handsearched relevant journal archives and contacted experts in the field to identify any unpublished or ongoing studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing crisis interventions with usual care, no intervention or waiting list, in adults of any age diagnosed with BPD.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We included two studies with 213 participants. One study (88 participants) was a feasibility RCT conducted in the UK that examined the effects of joint crisis plans (JCPs) plus treatment as usual (TAU) compared to TAU alone in people diagnosed with BPD. The primary outcome was self-harm. Participants had an average age of 36 years, and 81% were women. Government research councils funded the study. Risk of bias was unclear for blinding, but low in the other domains assessed. Evidence from this study suggested that there may be no difference between JCPs and TAU on deaths (risk ratio (RR) 0.91, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 14.14; 88 participants; low-certainty evidence); mean number of self-harm episodes (mean difference (MD) 0.30, 95% CI -36.27 to 36.87; 72 participants; low-certainty evidence), number of inpatient mental health nights (MD 1.80, 95% CI -5.06 to 8.66; 73 participants; low-certainty evidence), or quality of life measured using the EuroQol five-dimension questionnaire (EQ-5D; MD -6.10, 95% CI -15.52 to 3.32; 72 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The study authors calculated an Incremental Cost Effectiveness Ratio of GBP -32,358 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY), favouring JCPs, but they described this result as "hypothesis-generating only" and we rated this as very low-certainty evidence.  The other study (125 participants) was an RCT conducted in Sweden of brief admission to psychiatric hospital by self-referral (BA) compared to TAU, in people with self-harm or suicidal behaviour and three or more diagnostic criteria for BPD. The primary outcome was use of inpatient mental health services. Participants had an average age of 32 years, and 85% were women. Government research councils and non-profit foundations funded the study. Risk of bias was unclear for blinding and baseline imbalances, but low in the other domains assessed. The evidence suggested that there is no clear difference between BA and TAU on deaths (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.29; 125 participants; low-certainty evidence), mean number of self-harm episodes (MD -0.03, 95% CI -2.26 to 2.20; 125 participants; low-certainty evidence), violence perpetration (RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.13; 125 participants; low-certainty evidence), or days of inpatient mental health care (MD 0.70, 95% CI -14.32 to 15.72; 125 participants; low-certainty evidence). The study suggested that BA may have little or no effect on the mean number of suicide attempts (MD 0.00, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.06; 125 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We also identified three ongoing RCTs that met our inclusion criteria. The results will be incorporated into future updates of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

A comprehensive search of the literature revealed very little RCT-based evidence to inform the management of acute crises in people diagnosed with BPD. We included two studies of two very different types of intervention (JCP and BA). We found no clear evidence of a benefit over TAU in any of our main outcomes. We are very uncertain about the true effects of either intervention, as the evidence was judged low- and very low-certainty, and there was only a single study of each intervention. There is an urgent need for high-quality, large-scale, adequately powered RCTs on crisis interventions for people diagnosed with BPD, in addition to development of new crisis interventions.

Off-label use of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizers in psychiatry

Off-label drug prescribing in psychiatry is increasing. Many psychotropic drugs are approved for psychopathologic syndromes rather than based on international standard diagnostic classification systems which might facilitate the clinical decision for off-label prescriptions. The objective of this study was to analyze the prevalence and category of off-label use of psychotropic drugs. The study was conducted in 10 psychiatric hospitals in Germany over a period of 2 years. Prescription data of all patients were retrospectively analyzed after identification of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizers, which were classified as off-label according to the German prescribing information and diagnostic classification according to ICD-10. In total, 53,909 patient cases (46% female) with a mean age of 46.8 (SD: 18) years were included in the study. 30.2% of the cases received at least one off-label prescription of a psychotropic drug during hospital stay. Off-label prevalence rates differed markedly between different diagnostic groups (ICD-10 F0/G3: 47%, F1: 33%, F2: 25%, F3: 21%, F4: 27%, F6: 46%, F7: 84%). The most often off-label prescribed drugs were quetiapine and mirtazapine for organic mental disorders (F0/G3), valproate and quetiapine in patients with disorders due to psychoactive substance use (F1), valproate in patients with psychotic disorders (F2), and risperidone and olanzapine in patients with affective disorders (F3). The prevalence rate of psychotropic off-label prescriptions is high if restricted to product description and ICD-10 diagnosis. Therefore, current psychiatric guidelines should drug-specifically issue this problem by defining psychiatric off-label indications based on a clear benefit-risk assessment.

Using a generative model of affect to characterize affective variability and its response to treatment in bipolar disorder

The affective variability of bipolar disorder (BD) is thought to qualitatively differ from that of borderline personality disorder (BPD), with changes in affect persisting longer in BD. However, quantitative studies have not been able to confirm this distinction. It has therefore not been possible to accurately quantify how treatments like lithium influence affective variability in BD. We assessed the affective variability associated with BD and BPD as well as the effect of lithium using a computational model that defines two subtypes of variability: affective changes that persist (volatility) and changes that do not (noise). We hypothesized that affective volatility would be raised in the BD group, noise would be raised in the BPD group, and that lithium would impact affective volatility. Daily affect ratings were prospectively collected for up to 3 y from patients with BD or BPD and nonclinical controls. In a separate experimental medicine study, patients with BD were randomized to receive lithium or placebo, with affect ratings collected from week -2 to +4. We found a diagnostically specific pattern of affective variability. Affective volatility was raised in patients with BD, whereas affective noise was raised in patients with BPD. Rather than suppressing affective variability, lithium increased the volatility of positive affect in both studies. These results provide a quantitative measure of the affective variability associated with BD and BPD. They suggest a mechanism of action for lithium, whereby periods of persistently low or high affect are avoided by increasing the volatility of affective responses.

Efficacy and tolerability of Brain Stimulation interventions in Borderline Personality Disorder: state of the art and future perspectives - A systematic review

Treating Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a major challenge for psychiatrists. As Brain Stimulation represents an alternative approach to treat psychiatric disorders, our systematic review is the first to focus on both invasive and Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation (NIBS) interventions in people living with BPD, examining clinical effects over core features and comorbid conditions. Following PRISMA guidelines, out of 422 original records, 24 papers were included regarding Deep Brain Stimulation (n = 1), Electroconvulsive therapy (n = 5), Transcranial Magnetic Stimulation (n = 13) and transcranial Direct Current Stimulation (n = 5). According to impulsivity and emotional dysregulated domain improvements, NIBS in BPD appears to restore frontolimbic network deficiencies. NIBS seems also to modulate depressive features. Safety and tolerability profiles for each technique are discussed. Despite encouraging results, definitive recommendations on Brain Stimulation in BPD are mitigated by protocols heterogeneity, lack of randomized controlled trials and poor quality of included studies, including high risk of methodological biases. To serve as guide for future systematic investigations, protocols optimization proposals are provided, focusing on alternative stimulation sites and suggesting a NIBS symptom-based approach.

Remission of Suicidal Ideation in Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder with Flupenthixol

There are currently no licensed pharmacological treatments for Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder. This case report describes a 50-year-old male who two years previously had been brought to the attention of psychiatric services following an overdose with intention to end his life. He was subsequently diagnosed with Emotionally Unstable Personality Disorder (EUPD) and, following further suicide attempts and trials of mainstream pharmacological treatments, responded to flupenthixol IM 20 mg fortnightly, experiencing complete remission from his suicidal ideation. Clinicians should be aware of EUPD presenting in later life and should consider the role of typical antipsychotics, including flupenthixol, in the treatment of suicidal ideation in patients with EUPD. Age-specific guidance on EUPD management would be of use to clinicians, especially in the management of older patients, as current guidance is based on findings within a narrow age group.

Patients With Personality Disorders in Everyday Clinical Practice–Implications of the ICD-11

BACKGROUND

Patients with difficult personalities or personality disorders are a special challenge for primary care physicians. Their style of interpersonal interaction is often difficult. As the ICD-11 classification comes into use, a new systematic approach to diagnosis is being introduced that focuses on the patient's functional impairments in everyday life. We describe the implications for the diagnosis and treatment of patients of this type.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search, with particular attention to primary care and to somatic morbidity and mortality.

RESULTS

10-12% of the population suffers from personality disorders. A high degree of psychiatric comorbidity is typical; somatic diseases are also more than twice as common as in the general population. In emergency medicine, persons with personality disorders are more likely than others to present with a suicide attempt. Their lifetime risk of suicide is between 1.4% and 4.5% (the latter for persons with borderline personality disorder).

CONCLUSION

Primary care physicians have an important role in the initial diagnosis of patients with personality disorders and in the planning of their treatment. Such patients require special care and attention from their physicians in view of their elevated somatic morbidity and mortality. In everyday clinical practice, physicians who encounter patients with complex and persistent mental problems, or just with a difficult style of interpersonal interaction, should consider the possibility of a personality disorder and motivate such patients to undergo psychotherapy, if indicated.

Self-report screening instruments differentiate bipolar disorder and borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) and borderline personality disorder (BPD) share overlapping phenomenology and are frequently misdiagnosed. This study investigated the diagnostic accuracy of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and McLean Screening Instrument for Borderline Personality Disorder (MSI) in a clinical inpatient setting and whether individual screening items could differentiate BD from BPD.

METHODS

757 sequential inpatients admitted to a Mood Disorder Unit completed both the MDQ and MSI. Screen positive for the MDQ was defined as ≥7/13 symptoms endorsed with concurrence and at least moderate impact. Screen positive for the MSI was defined as a score of ≥7. The clinical discharge summary diagnosis completed by a board-certified psychiatrist was used as the reference standard to identify concordance rates of a positive screen with clinical diagnosis. Individual items predicting one disorder and simultaneously predicting absence of other disorder by odds ratio (OR>and <1) were identified.

RESULTS

Both screening instruments were more specific than sensitive (MDQ 83.7%/ 67.8%, MSI 73.2% / 63.3%). MDQ individual items (elevated mood, grandiosity, increased energy, pressured speech, decreased need for sleep, hyperactivity) were significant predictors of BD diagnosis and non-predictors of BPD diagnosis. Whereas MSI subitem, self-harm behaviors/suicidal attempts predicted BPD in the absence of BD; distrust and irritability were additional predictors of BPD.

CONCLUSION

While this study is limited by the lack of structured diagnostic interview, these data provide differential symptoms to discriminate BD and BPD. Further work with larger datasets and more rigorous bioinformatics machine learning methodology is encouraged to continue to identify distinguishing features of these two disorders to guide diagnostic precision and subsequent treatment recommendations.

Importance of EPA and DHA Blood Levels in Brain Structure and Function

Brain structure and function depend on a constant and sufficient supply with eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) by blood. Blood levels of EPA and DHA reflect dietary intake and other variables and are preferably assessed as percentage in erythrocytes with a well-documented and standardized analytical method (HS-Omega-3 Index^®). Every human being has an Omega-3 Index between 2 and 20%, with an optimum of 8–11%. Compared to an optimal Omega-3 Index, a lower Omega-3 Index was associated with increased risk for total mortality and ischemic stroke, reduced brain volume, impaired cognition, accelerated progression to dementia, psychiatric diseases, compromises of complex brain functions, and other brain issues in epidemiologic studies. Most intervention trials, and their meta-analyses considered EPA and DHA as drugs with good bioavailability, a design tending to produce meaningful results in populations characterized by low baseline blood levels (e.g., in major depression), but otherwise responsible for many neutral results and substantial confusion. When trial results were evaluated using blood levels of EPA and DHA measured, effects were larger than comparing EPA and DHA to placebo groups, and paralleled epidemiologic findings. This indicates future trial design, and suggests a targeted use EPA and DHA, based on the Omega-3 Index.

Selective Serotonin Reuptake-Inhibitors for Symptom-Based Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorders in Older Adults: An International Delphi Study

OBJECTIVE

International guidelines on symptom-based treatment of borderline personality disorders (BPD) in older adults are lacking. The number of older adults (≥ 65 years) with borderline personality disorder is rising. Effectiveness of Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRIs) on symptoms of BPD has only been investigated in younger adults and results are ambiguous. During life, serotonergic function changes, which can influence the indication and effectiveness of SSRIs in older adults with BPD. Aim of this study is to reach consensus on the suitability of SSRIs for the treatment of older adults with BPD.

METHODS

A Delphi study was conducted among eighteen international experts. In three successive rounds, a total of 16 statements addressing the treatment with SSRI's in older adults with BPD were assessed. Consensus on specific statements was reached if at least two-third of these experts agreed.

RESULTS

Consensus was reached on 11 statements related to the indication and effectiveness of SSRIs in the treatment of older adults with BPD.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest a valuable role for SSRIs in the treatment of affective instability, and to a lesser extent impulsive behavior, in older adults with BPD. Sertraline or citalopram are suggested to be the first-choice medication but should be prescribed with some caution. Treatment recommendations have been suggested (presented in a flowchart), but still have to be investigated in clinical practice.

Symptomatological Variants and Related Clinical Features in Adult Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder

A large amount of the current literature has focused on the characteristic symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) in children and adolescents. In contrast, less attention has been devoted to ADHD clinical subtypes in adult patients. We evaluated 164 consecutive adult ADHD (A-ADHD) outpatients using DSM-5 criteria and many specific rating scales and questionnaires. A principal component factor analysis was performed on clinical and symptomatological variables to describe potential clinical variants. We sought to determine different A-ADHD variants focusing on demographic and clinical features. A four-factor solution was identified, and patients were clustered, according to their z-score, in 4 subgroups. The first was marked out by Emotional Dysregulation (ED), the second by Substance Use (SU), the third by Core-ADHD Symptoms (Co-ADHD) and the fourth by Positive Emotionality (PE). Predominantly ED patients showed worse overall function, early treatment with antidepressants and a greater presence of borderline personality disorder than predominantly Co-ADHD patients. Predominantly SU patients reported high rates of bipolar disorder and severe general psychopathology. The PE factor was related to hyperthymic temperament and hypomania and showed a higher level of functioning. Females with A-ADHD showed a lower risk of being included in SU, and A-ADHD patients with co-occurring delayed sleep phase had less risk of being included in the SU factor than the prevailing Co-ADHD group. Our empirically based description of four clinical A-ADHD variants shows several aspects beyond the definition given by the DSM-5 diagnostic criteria.

Pharmacological interventions for self-harm in adults

BACKGROUND

Self-harm (SH; intentional self-poisoning or self-injury regardless of degree of suicidal intent or other types of motivation) is a growing problem in most countries, often repeated, and associated with suicide. Evidence assessing the effectiveness of pharmacological agents and/or natural products in the treatment of SH is lacking, especially when compared with the evidence for psychosocial interventions. This review therefore updates a previous Cochrane Review (last published in 2015) on the role of pharmacological interventions for SH in adults.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological agents or natural products for SH compared to comparison types of treatment (e.g. placebo or alternative pharmacological treatment) for adults (aged 18 years or older) who engage in SH.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Common Mental Disorders Specialised Register, the Cochrane Library (Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL] and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews [CDSR]), together with MEDLINE. Ovid Embase and PsycINFO (to 4 July 2020).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological agents or natural products with placebo/alternative pharmacological treatment in individuals with a recent (within six months of trial entry) episode of SH resulting in presentation to hospital or clinical services. The primary outcome was the occurrence of a repeated episode of SH over a maximum follow-up period of two years. Secondary outcomes included treatment acceptability, treatment adherence, depression, hopelessness, general functioning, social functioning, suicidal ideation, and suicide.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We independently selected trials, extracted data, and appraised trial quality. For binary outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and their 95% confidence internals (CIs). For continuous outcomes we calculated the mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. The overall certainty of evidence for the primary outcome (i.e. repetition of SH at post-intervention) was appraised for each intervention using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included data from seven trials with a total of 574 participants. Participants in these trials were predominately female (63.5%) with a mean age of 35.3 years (standard deviation (SD) 3.1 years). It is uncertain if newer generation antidepressants reduce repetition of SH compared to placebo (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.19; N = 129; k = 2; very low-certainty evidence). There may be a lower rate of SH repetition for antipsychotics (21%) as compared to placebo (75%) (OR 0.09, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.50; N = 30; k = 1; low-certainty evidence). However, there was no evidence of a difference between antipsychotics compared to another comparator drug/dose for repetition of SH (OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.58; N = 53; k = 1; low-certainty evidence). There was also no evidence of a difference for mood stabilisers compared to placebo for repetition of SH (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.95; N = 167; k = 1; very low-certainty evidence), or for natural products compared to placebo for repetition of SH (OR 1.33, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.62; N = 49; k = 1; lo- certainty) evidence.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Given the low or very low quality of the available evidence, and the small number of trials identified, there is only uncertain evidence regarding pharmacological interventions in patients who engage in SH. More and larger trials of pharmacotherapy are required, preferably using newer agents. These might include evaluation of newer atypical antipsychotics. Further work should also include evaluation of adverse effects of pharmacological agents. Other research could include evaluation of combined pharmacotherapy and psychological treatment.

Efficacy of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids (PUFAs) on Impulsive Behaviours and Aggressiveness in Psychiatric Disorders

It is the focus of increasing interest to investigate the effects of long-chain n-3 and long-chain n-6 polyunsaturated fatty acids (LC n-3 PUFAs; LC n-6 PUFAs) on psychiatric symptoms in a transdiagnostic perspective. There is some evidence that low levels of LC n-3 PUFAs and a higher ratio of LC n-6 to LC n-3 PUFAs in plasma and blood cells are associated with aggressive and impulsive behaviours. Therefore, implementation of LC n-3 PUFAs may produce positive effects on hostility, aggression, and impulsivity in both psychiatric and non-psychiatric samples across different stages of life. A possible mechanism of action of LC n-3 PUFAs in conditions characterized by a high level of impulsivity and aggression is due to the effect of these compounds on the serotonin system and membrane stability. Studies that evaluated the effects of LC n-3 PUFAs on impulsivity and aggressiveness indicated that addition of rather low doses of these agents to antipsychotic treatment might reduce agitation and violent behaviours in psychosis, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, personality disorders, and impulsive control and conduct disorders. The present review is aimed at examining and discussing available data from recent trials on this topic.

Pharmacological Treatments for Borderline Personality Disorder: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a debilitating psychiatric disorder that affects 0.4-3.9% of the population in Western countries. Currently, no medications have been approved by regulatory agencies for the treatment of BPD. Nevertheless, up to 96% of patients with BPD receive at least one psychotropic medication.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to assess the general efficacy and the comparative effectiveness of different pharmacological treatments for BPD patients.

METHODS

We conducted systematic literature searches limited to English language in MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO up to April 6, 2021, and searched reference lists of pertinent articles and reviews. Inclusion criteria were (i) patients 13 years or older with a diagnosis of BPD, (ii) treatment with anticonvulsive medications, antidepressants, antipsychotic medications, benzodiazepines, melatonin, opioid agonists or antagonists, or sedative or hypnotic medications for at least 8 weeks, (iii) comparison with placebo or an eligible medication, (iv) assessment of health-relevant outcomes, (v) randomized or non-randomized trials or controlled observational studies. Two investigators independently screened abstracts and full-text articles and graded the certainty of evidence based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. For meta-analyses, we used restricted maximum likelihood random effects models to estimate pooled effects.

RESULTS

Of 12,062 unique records, we included 21 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with data on 1768 participants. Nineteen RCTs compared pharmacotherapies with placebo; two RCTs assessed active treatments head-to-head. Out of 87 medications in use in clinical practice, we found studies on just nine. Overall, the evidence indicates that the efficacy of pharmacotherapies for the treatment of BPD is limited. Second-generation antipsychotics, anticonvulsants, and antidepressants were not able to consistently reduce the severity of BPD. Low-certainty evidence indicates that anticonvulsants can improve specific symptoms associated with BPD such as anger, aggression, and affective lability but the evidence is mostly limited to single studies. Second-generation antipsychotics had little effect on the severity of specific BPD symptoms, but they improved general psychiatric symptoms in patients with BPD.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the common use of pharmacotherapies for patients with BPD, the available evidence does not support the efficacy of pharmacotherapies alone to reduce the severity of BPD.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO registration number, CRD42020194098.

Targeting the Endocannabinoid System in Borderline Personality Disorder: Corticolimbic and Hypothalamic Perspectives

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a chronic debilitating psychiatric disorder characterized mainly by emotional instability, chaotic interpersonal relationships, cognitive disturbance (e.g., dissociation and suicidal thoughts) and maladaptive behaviors. BPD has a high rate of comorbidity with other mental disorders and a high burden on society. In this review, we focused on two compromised brain regions in BPD - the hypothalamus and the corticolimbic system, emphasizing the involvement and potential contribution of the endocannabinoid system (ECS) to improvement in symptoms and coping. The hypothalamus-regulated endocrine axes (hypothalamic pituitary - gonadal, thyroid & adrenal) have been found to be dysregulated in BPD. There is also substantial evidence for limbic system structural and functional changes in BPD, especially in the amygdala and hippocampus, including cortical regions within the corticolimbic system. Extensive expression of CB1 and CB2 receptors of the ECS has been found in limbic regions and the hypothalamus. This opens new windows of opportunity for treatment with cannabinoids such as cannabidiol (CBD) as no other pharmacological treatment has shown long-lasting improvement in the BPD population to date. This review aims to show the potential role of the ECS in BPD patients through their most affected brain regions, the hypothalamus and the corticolimbic system. The literature reviewed does not allow for general indications of treatment with CBD in BPD. However, there is enough knowledge to indicate a treatment ratio of a high level of CBD to a low level of THC. A randomized controlled trial investigating the efficacy of cannabinoid based treatments in BPD is warranted.

Psychopharmacological treatment in borderline personality disorder: A pilot observational study in a real-world setting

Psychotherapy is the cornerstone of treatment for borderline personality disorder (BPD) while pharmacotherapy should be considered only as an adjunctive intervention. In clinical practice, however, most of BPD patients only receive medication. The aim of the study is to first describe pharmacological treatment in BPD patients in Italy and secondly to evaluate if comorbidity or illness severity are associated with the prescription of different class compounds. Data on pharmacological treatment and clinical evaluation of 75 BPD patients were collected in 5 clinical settings. The association between comorbidity and medication was assessed. Moreover, we evaluated the association between pharmacotherapy and severity, defined by a cluster analysis aimed at detecting different groups of patients. Most of the participants (82.7%) were characterized by polypharmacy, with a mean of 2.4 medications per person. Interestingly, the prescription didn't seem to depend on/be based on the severity of the disorder and was only partially determined by the presence of comorbidity. In conclusion, our findings are similar to what described in other clinical studies, supporting the idea that medication management for BPD is only partially coherent with international guidelines. This pilot study confirms the need for more rigorous studies to gain greater understanding of this topic and diminish the gap between guidelines and the real clinical world.

A mechanism-based group-psychotherapy approach to aggressive behaviour in borderline personality disorder: findings from a cluster-randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Aggressive behaviour is a prevalent and harmful phenomenon in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). However, no short-term, low-cost programme exists that specifically focuses on aggression.

AIMS

Attuning therapy modules to pathogenetic mechanisms that underlie reactive aggression in BPD, we composed a 6 week mechanism-based anti-aggression psychotherapy (MAAP) approach for the group setting, which we tested against a non-specific supportive psychotherapy (NSSP).

METHOD

A cluster-randomised two-arm parallel-group phase II trial of N = 59 patients with BPD and overt aggressive behaviour was performed (German Registry for Clinical Trials, DRKS00009445). The primary outcome was the externally directed overt aggression score of the Modified Overt Aggression Scale (M-OAS) post-treatment (adjusted for pre-treatment overt aggression). Secondary outcomes were M-OAS irritability, M-OAS response rate and ecological momentary assessment of anger post-treatment and at 6 month follow-up, as well as M-OAS overt aggression score at follow-up.

RESULTS

Although no significant difference in M-OAS overt aggression between treatments was found post-treatment (adjusted difference in mean 3.49 (95% CI -5.32 to 12.31, P = 0.22), the MAAP group showed a clinically relevant decrease in aggressive behaviour of 65% on average (versus 33% in the NSSP group), with particularly strong improvement among those with the highest baseline aggression. Most notably, significant differences in reduction in overt aggression between MAAP and NSSP were found at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with BPD and aggressive behaviour benefited from a short group psychotherapy, with improvements particularly visible at 6 month follow-up. Further studies are required to show whether these effects are specific to MAAP.

Construction and Validation of a Self-report Subjective Emptiness Scale

Subjective emptiness is a psychiatric symptom that is primarily assessed and studied as a criterion of borderline personality disorder, even though research suggests that it may have clinical importance beyond that diagnosis. The aim of this series of studies was to develop and validate a standalone self-report measure of subjective emptiness. A systematic, multistep approach to identifying test content was used to generate 88 items that were then trimmed to 53 via ratings of interviews with patients and experts. This preliminary scale was administered to a sample of 544 university students, and a trimmed version was given to two samples oversampled for clinical problems (n = 1,067; n = 1,016). A five-item measure fit a unidimensional model well and had satisfactory internal consistency across these samples. External validity analyses suggested that emptiness, as measured by the Subjective Emptiness Scale, is strongly related to a number of clinical constructs, particularly in the internalizing domain, indicating that emptiness is an important construct to consider in its own right, independent of its presence in the borderline criterion set.

Pharmacotherapy for Borderline Personality Disorder: an Update of Published, Unpublished and Ongoing Studies

PURPOSE OF THE REVIEW

We aim to identify the most recent evidence of randomised controlled trials evaluating continued drug treatments in people with a diagnosis of BPD, review the most recent findings, highlight trends in terms of currently ongoing studies and comment on the overall body of evidence.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified seven new RCTs, plus newly available data for an older RCT. Only three of these RCTs have been published in full text, while we found study data posted at trial registry platforms for the others. The new findings do not support fluoxetine as a treatment option for suicide and self-harm prevention. A large effectiveness study did not detect beneficial effects of lamotrigine in routine care. The prevalent use of medications in BPD is still not reflected or supported by the current evidence. More research is needed regarding the most commonly used substances and substance classes, i.e. SSRIs, and quetiapine, but also with respect to people presenting with distinct comorbid conditions.

Severity of Topiramate-Related Working Memory Impairment Is Modulated by Plasma Concentration and Working Memory Capacity

Drug side effects that impair cognition can lead to diminished quality of life and discontinuation of therapy. Topiramate is an antiepileptic drug that elicits cognitive deficits more frequently than other antiepileptic drugs, impairing multiple cognitive domains including language, attention, and memory. Although up to 40% of individuals taking topiramate may experience cognitive deficits, we are currently unable to predict which individuals will be most severely affected before administration. The objective of this study was to show the contributions of plasma concentration and working memory capacity in determining the severity of an individual's topiramate-related cognitive impairment. Subjects were enrolled in a double-blind, placebo-controlled crossover study during which they received a single dose of either 100, 150, or 200 mg topiramate. Working memory function was assessed using a modified Sternberg working memory task with 3 memory loads administered 4 hours after dosing. After adjustment for differences in working memory capacity, each 1 μg/mL of topiramate plasma concentration was associated with a 3.6% decrease in accuracy for all memory loads. Placebo effects occurred as a function of working memory capacity, with individuals with high working memory capacity experiencing less severe placebo-related impairment compared with those with low working memory capacity. Our results demonstrate that severity of topiramate-related cognitive deficits occurs as a function of both drug exposure and baseline cognitive function. By identifying patient- and exposure-related characteristics that modulate the severity of cognitive side effects, topiramate dosing strategies may be individually tailored in the future to prevent unwanted cognitive impairment.

Pharmacological management of depression: Japanese expert consensus

BACKGROUND

Clinically relevant issues in the real-world treatment of depression have not always been captured by conventional treatment guidelines.

METHODS

Certified psychiatrists of the Japanese Society of Clinical Neuropsychopharmacology were asked to evaluate treatment options regarding 23 clinical situations in the treatment of depression using a 9-point Likert scale (1="disagree" and 9="agree"). According to the responses of 114 experts, the options were categorized into first-, second-, and third-line treatments.

RESULTS

First-line antidepressants varied depending on predominant symptoms: escitalopram (mean ± standard deviation score, 7.8 ± 1.7) and sertraline (7.3 ± 1.7) were likely selected for anxiety; duloxetine (7.6 ± 1.9) and venlafaxine (7.2 ± 2.1) for loss of interest; mirtazapine for insomnia (8.2 ± 1.6), loss of appetite (7.9 ± 1.9), agitation and severe irritation (7.4 ± 2.0), and suicidal ideation (7.5 ± 1.9). While first-line treatment was switched to either an SNRI (7.7 ± 1.9) or mirtazapine (7.4 ± 2.0) in the case of non-response to an SSRI, switching to mirtazapine (7.1 ± 2.2) was recommended in the case of non-response to an SNRI, and vice versa (switching to an SNRI (7.0 ± 2.0) in the case of non-response to mirtazapine). Augmentation with aripiprazole was considered the first-line treatment for partial response to an SSRI (7.1 ± 2.3) or SNRI (7.0 ± 2.5).

LIMITATIONS

The evidence level of expert consensus is considered low. All included experts were Japanese.

CONCLUSIONS

Recommendations made by experts in the field are useful and can supplement guidelines and informed decision making in real-world clinical practice. We suggest that pharmacological strategies for depression be flexible and that each patient's situational needs as well as the pharmacotherapeutic profile of medications be considered.

Alcohol Use Disorder and Antisocial and Borderline Personality Disorders

Alcohol use disorder (AUD) frequently co-occurs with other psychiatric disorders, including personality disorders, which are pervasive, persistent, and impairing. Personality disorders are associated with myriad serious outcomes, have a high degree of co-occurrence with substance use disorders, including AUD, and incur significant health care costs. This literature review focuses on co-occurring AUD and personality disorders characterized by impulsivity and affective dysregulation, specifically antisocial personality disorders and borderline personality disorders. Prevalence rates, potential explanations and causal models of co-occurrence, prognoses, and the status of existing treatment research are summarized. Several important future research considerations are relevant to these complex, co-occurring conditions. Research assessing mechanisms responsible for co-occurring AUD and antisocial personality disorder or borderline personality disorder will further delineate the underlying developmental processes and improve understanding of onset and courses. In addition, increased focus on the efficacy and effectiveness of treatments targeting underlying traits or common factors in these disorders will inform future prevention and treatment efforts, as interventions targeting these co-occurring conditions have relatively little empirical support.

Pharmacotherapy of borderline personality disorder: what has changed over two decades? A retrospective evaluation of clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to assess the pharmacological treatment strategies of inpatients with borderline personality disorder between 2008 and 2012. Additionally, we compared pharmacotherapy during this period to a previous one (1996 to 2004).

METHODS

Charts of 87 patients with the main diagnosis of borderline personality disorder receiving inpatient treatment in the University Medical Center of Goettingen, Germany, between 2008 and 2012 were evaluated retrospectively. For each inpatient treatment, psychotropic drug therapy including admission and discharge medication was documented. We compared the prescription rates of the interval 2008-2012 with the interval 1996-2004.

RESULTS

94% of all inpatients of the interval 2008-2012 were treated with at least one psychotropic drug at time of discharge. All classes of psychotropic drugs were applied. We found high prescription rates of naltrexone (35.6%), quetiapine (19.5%), mirtazapine (18.4%), sertraline (12.6%), and escitalopram (11.5%). Compared to 1996-2004, rates of low-potency antipsychotics, tri-/tetracyclic antidepressants and mood stabilizers significantly decreased while usage of naltrexone significantly increased.

CONCLUSIONS

In inpatient settings, pharmacotherapy is still highly prevalent in the management of BPD. Prescription strategies changed between 1996 and 2012. Quetiapine was preferred, older antidepressants and low-potency antipsychotics were avoided. Opioid antagonists are increasingly used and should be considered for further investigation.

Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids: What is Their Role in Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders?

In the central nervous system omega-3 fatty acids modulate cell signaling and affect dopaminergic and serotonergic pathways. On this basis, a new application for omega-3 fatty acids has been proposed, concerning the treatment of several psychiatric disorders. The present article is an update of a previous systematic review and is aimed to provide a complete report of data published in the period between 1980 and 2019 on efficacy and tolerability of omega-3 fatty acids in psychiatric disorders. In July 2019, an electronic search on PUBMED, Medline and PsychINFO of all RCTs, systematic reviews and meta-analyses on omega-3 fatty acids and psychiatric disorders without any filter or MESH restriction was performed. After eligibility processes, the final number of records included in this review was 126. One hundred and two of these studies were RCTs, while 24 were reviews and meta-analyses. The role of omega-3 fatty acids was studied in schizophrenia, major depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, obsessive-compulsive disorder, post-traumatic stress disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism spectrum disorders, eating disorders, substance use disorder and borderline personality disorder. The main evidence of the efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids has been obtained in treating depressive symptoms in patients with major depression and, to a lesser degree, bipolar depression. Some efficacy was also found in early phases of schizophrenia in addition to antipsychotic treatment, but not in the chronic phases of psychosis. Small beneficial effects of omega-3 fatty acids were observed in ADHD and positive results were reported in a few trials on core symptoms of borderline personality disorder. For other psychiatric disorders results are inconsistent.

Trim the fat: the role of omega-3 fatty acids in psychopharmacology

The American Psychiatric Association (APA) currently recommends the use of omega-3 fatty acid supplementation for depressive disorders, impulse-control disorders, and psychotic disorders in treatment guidelines. This review examines the evidence for efficacy of omega-3 fatty acids in depressive disorders, bipolar disorder, anxiety disorders, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and psychosis. Meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials of omega-3 fatty acids for depression are inconclusive, with strong evidence of publication bias, sizable heterogeneity between included studies, and substantial methodological shortcomings in included trials. The large amount of heterogeneity in findings of RCTs of omega-3 fatty acids for unipolar depression is likely attributable to highly heterogeneous sample populations that are given different omega-3 supplements [which differ widely in eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) content, ratio, and dosage] as either adjunctive or monotherapy of other existing treatments, and then measure several different outcomes of depression symptomatology with likely incomplete blinding. Evidence of efficacy of omega-3 supplementation in treating psychosis, PTSD, anxiety, and bipolar mania is minimal. The current guidelines recommending the use of omega-3 fatty acids in adulthood psychiatric conditions should be revisited, especially given several recent negative studies examining the effects of omega-3 fatty acids for cardiovascular disease. Recommending likely ineffective treatment to patients, no matter how benign the side-effect profile, has opportunity cost (e.g. other more effective medications or therapies not being utilized) and likely affects patient compliance with other evidence-based treatments.

European guidelines for personality disorders: past, present and future

Personality disorders (PD) are common and burdensome mental disorders. The treatment of individuals with PD represents one of the more challenging areas in the field of mental health and health care providers need evidence-based recommendations to best support patients with PDs. Clinical guidelines serve this purpose and are formulated by expert consensus and/or systematic reviews of the current evidence. In this review, European guidelines for the treatment of PDs are summarized and evaluated. To date, eight countries in Europe have developed and published guidelines that differ in quality with regard to recency and completeness, transparency of methods, combination of expert knowledge with empirical data, and patient/service user involvement. Five of the guidelines are about Borderline personality disorder (BPD), one is about antisocial personality disorder and three concern PD in general. After evaluating the methodological quality of the nine European guidelines from eight countries, results in the domains of diagnosis, psychotherapy and pharmacological treatment of PD are discussed. Our comparison of guidelines reveals important contradictions between recommendations in relation to diagnosis, length and setting of treatment, as well as the use of pharmacological treatment. All the guidelines recommend psychotherapy as the treatment of first choice. Future guidelines should rigorously follow internationally accepted methodology and should more systematically include the views of patients and users.

Borderline personality disorder, trauma, and the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a complex psychiatric illness for which treatment poses a significant challenge due to limited effective pharmacologic treatments, and under-resourced psychological interventions. BPD is one of the most stigmatized conditions in psychiatry today, but can be understood as a modifiable, neurodevelopmental disorder that arises from maladaptive responses to trauma and stress. Stress susceptibility and reactivity in BPD is thought to mediate both the development and maintenance of BPD symptomatology, with trauma exposure considered an early life risk factor of development, and acute stress moderating symptom trajectory. An altered stress response has been characterized in BPD at the structural, neural, and neurobiological level, and is believed to underlie the maladaptive behavioral and cognitive symptomatology presented in BPD. The endocrine hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis represents a key stress response system, and growing evidence suggests it is dysfunctional in the BPD patient population. This theoretical review examines BPD in the context of a neurodevelopmental stress-related disorder, providing an overview of measurements of stress with a focus on HPA-axis measurement. Potential confounding factors associated with measurement of the HPA system are discussed, including sex and sex hormones, genetic factors, and the influence of sample collection methods. HPA-axis dysfunction in BPD largely mirrors findings demonstrated in post-traumatic stress disorder and may represent a valuable neuroendocrine target for diagnostic or treatment response biomarkers, or for which novel treatments can be investigated.

A Neuroscience-Oriented Research Approach to Borderline Personality Disorder

Traditionally, the study of personality disorders had been based on psychoanalytic or behavioral models. Over the past two decades, there has been an emerging neuroscience model of borderline personality disorder (BPD) grounded in the concept of BPD as a condition in which dysfunctional neural circuits underlie its pathological dimensions, some of which include emotion dysregulation (broadly encompassing affective instability, negative affectivity, and hyperarousal), abnormal interpersonal functioning, and impulsive aggression. This article, initiated at a joint Columbia University- Cornell University Think Tank on BPD with representation from the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, suggests how to advance research in BPD by studying the dimensions that underlie BPD in addition to studying the disorder as a unitary diagnostic entity. We suggest that linking the underlying neurobiological abnormalities to behavioral symptoms of the disorder can inform a research agenda to better understand BPD with its multiple presentations.

Treatment-induced brain plasticity in borderline personality disorder: review of functional MRI studies

Although neural substrates of symptoms expression in borderline personality disorder (BPD) have been studied extensively, neural mechanisms mediating post treatment amelioration of symptoms remain poorly characterized. Herein present review sheds a critical light on all here-to-date functional MRI findings of brain changes in BPD patients following a treatment with psychotherapy or drugs. Preliminary evidence points to downregulation of neuronal activity within the insula and amygdala, together with differential employment of prefrontal areas, mainly orbitofrontal cortex, anterior cingulate cortex and dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, as well as enhanced functional connectivity between limbic and prefrontal regions induced by dialectical behavioral therapy. Identifying neural circuits behind treatment processes may refine strategies to target specific symptoms, thereby resolving some of the controversies over BPD treatment.

Combination of Omega-3 Fatty Acids and Valproic Acid in Treatment of Borderline Personality Disorder: A Follow-Up Study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Some evidence of efficacy has been found for omega-3 fatty acids in patients with borderline personality disorder (BPD). In a previous 12-week randomized trial we assessed the efficacy of the combination of eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) and docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) with valproic acid, in comparison with valproic acid monotherapy, in 43 BPD outpatients. Combined therapy was superior to valproic acid monotherapy (the control group) in the treatment of some BPD symptoms: impulsive-behavioral dyscontrol, outbursts of anger, and self-harm. The present study is a 24-week follow-up aimed at evaluating whether the differences in efficacy between the two subgroups were maintained after discontinuation of omega-3 fatty acids.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients who completed the 12-week trial entered the follow-up study. Participants were evaluated at the beginning and at the end of the follow-up period using the rating scales that showed a significant difference between the groups after the 12-week trial with fatty acids supplementation: the Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index (BPDSI) (items 'impulsivity' and 'outbursts of anger'), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale-Version 11 (BIS-11), and Self Harm Inventory (SHI). Statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) for repeated measures.

RESULTS

At the end of the follow-up a significant difference within groups was maintained for all four variables examined, while a significant difference between groups was maintained for outbursts of anger. Concerning tolerability, no clinically significant adverse effects were registered during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSIONS

Combined therapy with omega-3 fatty acids showed long-lasting effects after discontinuation in terms of anger control.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) and allocated the code: ACTRN12612001150831.

Aggression Following Traumatic brain injury: Effectiveness of Risperidone (AFTER): study protocol for a feasibility randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Traumatic brain injury (TBI) is a major public health concern and many people develop long-lasting physical and neuropsychiatric consequences following a TBI. Despite the emphasis on physical rehabilitation, it is the emotional and behavioural consequences that have greater impact on people with TBI and their families. One such problem behaviour is aggression which can be directed towards others, towards property or towards the self. Aggression is reported to be common after TBI (37-71%) and causes major stress for patients and their families. Both drug and non-drug interventions are used to manage this challenging behaviour, but the evidence-base for these interventions is poor and no drugs are currently licensed for the treatment of aggression following TBI. The most commonly used drugs for this purpose are antipsychotics, particularly second-generation drugs such as risperidone. Despite this widespread use, randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of antipsychotic drugs, including risperidone, have not been conducted. We have, therefore, set out to test the feasibility of conducting an RCT of this drug for people who have aggressive behaviour following TBI.

METHODS/DESIGN

We will examine the feasibility of conducting a placebo-controlled, double-blind RCT of risperidone for the management of aggression in adults with TBI and also assess participants' views about their experience of taking part in the study. We will randomise 50 TBI patients from secondary care services in four centres in London and Kent to up to 4 mg of risperidone orally or an inert placebo and follow them up 12 weeks later. Participants will be randomised to active or control treatment in a 1:1 ratio via an external and remote web-based randomisation service. Participants will be assessed at baseline and 12-week follow-up using a battery of assessment scales to measure changes in aggressive behaviour (MOAS, IRQ) as well as global functioning (GOS-E, CGI), quality of life (EQ-5D-5L, SF-12) and mental health (HADS). We will also assess the adverse effect profile with a standard scale (UKU) and collect available data from medical records on blood tests (serum glucose/HbA1c, lipid profile, prolactin), and check body weight and blood pressure. In addition completion of the MOAS and a check for any new or worsening side-effect will be completed weekly and used by the prescribing clinician to determine continuing dosage. Family carers' wellbeing will be assessed with CWSQ. Service use will be recorded using CSRI. A process evaluation will be carried out at the end of the trial using both qualitative and quantitative methodology.

DISCUSSION

Aggressive behaviour causes immense distress among some people with TBI and their families. By examining the feasibility of a double-blind, placebo-controlled RCT, we aim to discover whether this approach can successfully be used to test the effects of risperidone for the treatment of aggressive behaviour among people with aggression following TBI and improve the evidence base for the treatment of these symptoms. Our criteria for demonstrating success of the feasibility study are: (1) recruitment of at least 80% of the study sample, (2) uptake of intervention by at least 80% of participants in the active arm of the trial and (3) completion of follow-up interviews at 12 weeks by at least 75% of the study participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN30191436 . Registered on 19 December 2016.

Past, present, and future of genetic research in borderline personality disorder

Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD) is a major mental illness with a lifetime prevalence of approximately 1-3%, characterized by a persistent pattern of instability in relationships, mood, impulse regulation, and sense of self. This results in impulsive self-damaging behavior, high suicide rates, and severe functional impairment. BPD has a complex, multifactorial etiology, resulting from an interaction among genetic and environmental substrates, and has moderate to high heritability based on twin and family studies. However, our understanding of the genetic architecture of BPD is very limited. This is a critical obstacle since genetics can pave the way for identifying new treatment targets and developing preventive and disease-modifying pharmacological treatments which are currently lacking. We review genetic studies in BPD, with a focus on limitations and challenges and future directions. Genetic research in BPD is still in its very early stages compared to other major psychiatric disorders. Most early genetic studies in BPD were non-replicated association studies in small samples, focused on single candidate genes. More recently, there has been one genome-wide linkage study and a genome-wide association study (GWAS) of subclinical BPD traits and a first GWAS in a relatively modest sample of patients fulfilling full diagnostic criteria for the disorder. Although there are adequate animal models for some of the core dimensions of BPD, there is a lack of translational research including data from animal models in BPD. Research in more pioneering fields, such as imaging genetics, deep sequencing and epigenetics, holds promise for elucidating the pathophysiology of BPD and identifying new treatment targets.

Asenapine in the management of impulsivity and aggressiveness in bipolar disorder and comorbid borderline personality disorder: an open-label uncontrolled study

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) often co-occurres with bipolar disorder (BD). Impulsivity and aggressiveness represent core shared features and their pharmacological management is mainly based on mood stabilizers and antipsychotics, although scarce evidence is available for this context of comorbidity. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the role of Asenapine as an adjunctive drug for reducing aggressiveness and impulsivity in a sample of Italian BD type I outpatients with or without a comorbid BPD. This was an observational 12-week open-label uncontrolled clinical study carried out from April to October 2014 in two psychiatric clinics in Sicily. Each patient was treated with asenapine at two dose options, 5 mg (twice daily) or 10 mg (twice daily), and concomitant ongoing medications were not discontinued. We measured impulsivity using the Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (BIS) and aggressiveness using the Aggressive Questionnaire (AQ). For the analysis of our outcomes, patients were divided into two groups: with or without comorbid BPD. Adjunctive therapy was associated with a significant decrease of BIS and AQ overall scores in the entire bipolar sample. Yet, there was no significant difference in BIS and AQ reductions between subgroups. Using a regression model, we observed that concomitant BPD played a negative role on the Hostility subscale and overall AQ score variations; otherwise, borderline co-diagnosis was related positively to the reduction of physical aggression. According to our post-hoc analysis, global aggressiveness scores are less prone to decrease in patients with a dual diagnosis, whereas physical aggressiveness appears to be more responsive to the add-on therapy in patients with comorbidity.

Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

To assess the beneficial and harmful effects of pharmacological treatment for adolescents and adults with borderline personality disorder (BPD).

Pharmacotherapy of personality disorders: what we know and what we have to search for

Pharmacotherapy for personality disorders is in the early stage of development because the evidence base for effective drug treatment is insufficient, biased toward borderline personality disorder and rampant with methodological issues. In this paper, we reviewed randomized, placebo-controlled trials of drugs efficacy in patients with personality disorders published between 1990 and 2016. Overwhelming majority of studies focused on borderline personality disorder, and the accumulation of evidence resulted in seven meta-analyses, which are interpreted into better strategies for evidence-based practice. Little research attention was given to schizotypal and antisocial personality disorders, with only indirect treatment efficacy evidence for the obsessive–compulsive and avoidant personality disorders. Some avenues for future efficacy research are indicated.

Efficacy and Tolerability of Asenapine Compared with Olanzapine in Borderline Personality Disorder: An Open-Label Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Asenapine is a new second-generation antipsychotic that is understudied in borderline personality disorder (BPD). Only one study investigating the use of the drug in this indication (an open-label pilot study) has been conducted to date.

OBJECTIVE

The present open-label, randomized, controlled trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability of asenapine in comparison with olanzapine, the most broadly studied antipsychotic in BPD.

METHODS

A total of 51 outpatients aged between 18 and 50 years with a diagnosis of BPD based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) criteria were assigned for 12 weeks to asenapine (5-10 mg/day) or olanzapine (5-10 mg/day). Participants were assessed at baseline and after 12 weeks with the following instruments: the Clinical Global Impression Scale, Severity item (CGI-S), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A), Social Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale (SOFAS), Borderline Personality Disorder Severity Index (BPDSI), Barratt Impulsiveness Scale, version 11 (BIS-11), Modified Overt Aggression Scale (MOAS), Self-Harm Inventory (SHI), and Dosage Record and Treatment Emergent Symptom Scale (DOTES). Analysis of variance repeated measures was performed. Intention-to-treat analysis with last observation carried forward was conducted.

RESULTS

There were 11 drop-outs (21.57%): six patients taking asenapine and five patients receiving olanzapine. Two patients who received asenapine stopped the drug, one due to oral hypoesthesia and the other due to moderate anxiety. Two patients receiving olanzapine discontinued the treatment because of significant weight gain (≥3 kg). The remaining seven drop-outs resulted from the lack of compliance with the trial prescription. Forty out of the 51 patients (78%) completed the trial: 19 patients received asenapine, while 21 patients received olanzapine. We found a significant within-subject effect (trial duration) for all rating scales, except from the HAM-D, the MOAS, and two items of the BPDSI, namely, "identity disturbance" and "parasuicidal behaviors." A significant effect between subjects was found for the two items of the BPDSI "affective instability" and "dissociation/paranoid ideation." Asenapine was found superior to olanzapine in reducing the affective instability score (P = 0.001), whereas olanzapine was found superior to asenapine in reducing dissociation/paranoid ideation (P = 0.012). However, the study was found to be underpowered to detect a difference between the drugs on the dissociation/paranoid ideation item of the BPDSI. Two patients receiving asenapine experienced akathisia and another two restlessness/anxiety, while three patients receiving olanzapine reported somnolence and two fatigue.

CONCLUSIONS

Asenapine and olanzapine were demonstrated to have a similar efficacy. While asenapine was found to be more efficacious than olanzapine in treating affective instability, olanzapine was superior to asenapine in treating paranoid ideation and dissociation. However, the study was underpowered to detect a difference between groups on the dissociation/paranoid ideation item. Both medications were well tolerated, with asenapine being related to a higher frequency of oral hypoesthesia and akathisia, and olanzapine being prone to induce weight gain. The open-label study design, lack of a placebo group, and small sample size constitute major limitations of this trial. Our findings need to be replicated in further studies. Clinical Trials Registry code: ACTRN12614000551695.

Mistrustful and Misunderstood: A Review of Paranoid Personality Disorder

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Paranoid Personality Disorder (PPD) has historically been neglected by science out of proportion to its prevalence or its association with negative clinical outcomes. This review provides an update on what is known about PPD regarding its prevalence, demographics, comorbidity, biological mechanism, risk factors, and relationship to psychotic disorders.

RECENT FINDINGS

PPD has long been the subject of a rich and prescient theoretical literature which has provided a surprisingly coherent account of the psychological mechanism of non-delusional paranoia. Available data indicate that PPD has a close relationship with childhood trauma and social stress. Descriptive data on a sample of 115 individuals with Paranoid Personality Disorder is examined in comparison with a group of individuals with Borderline Personality Disorder. The descriptive data largely confirm previously identified relationships between Paranoid Personality Disorder and childhood trauma, violence, and race. We identify important similarities to and differences from Borderline Personality Disorder.

SUMMARY

PPD continues to be an important construct in the clinic and the laboratory. Available data lead to a reconsideration of the disorder as more closely related to trauma than to schizophrenia.

A Focused Systematic Review of Pharmacological Treatment for Borderline Personality Disorder

BACKGROUND

Medicines are routinely prescribed to treat borderline personality disorder (BPD) despite a relative lack of high-quality evidence and in breach of some treatment guidelines. An earlier Cochrane review of pharmacotherapy in BPD underlined the lack of evidence, encouraged the replication of earlier studies, but also emphasised the pressing need for more randomised placebo-controlled trials, and for those studies to employ broadened inclusion criteria.

METHOD

The authors searched bibliographic databases, reference lists of articles and trials registers. Records were screened to identify those that met the inclusion criteria. Full-text articles were screened and assessed for eligibility. On-going trials of pharmacotherapy in BPD were also identified.

RESULTS

Fifteen new studies of pharmacotherapy for BPD were identified since the earlier review. Eight of those examined second generation antipsychotics, two investigated mood stabilisers, three investigated antidepressants and two studied the effectiveness of opioid antagonists. Results for the effectiveness of antipsychotics appeared to be mixed. There has been little recent evidence to support the use of mood stabilisers. There is a lack of new placebo-controlled, randomised controlled trials investigating antidepressants and limited new evidence to support the use of opioid antagonists.

CONCLUSIONS

The review revealed that there remains a dearth of high-quality research evidence to help patients, carers and clinicians make sound and safe evidence-based decisions about medicines to treat BPD.

Oxytocin and Borderline Personality Disorder

Borderline personality disorder (BPD) is a prevalent and severe mental disorder with affect dysregulation, impulsivity, and interpersonal dysfunction as its core features. Up to now, six studies have been performed to investigate the role of oxytocin in the pathogenesis of BPD. While a beneficial effect of oxytocin on threat processing and stress responsiveness was found, other studies using an oxytocin challenge design presented with rather heterogeneous results. Future studies have to include a sufficiently large sample of patients, control for gender, and focus on mechanisms known to be related to aversive early life experiences.

Treating nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) in adolescents: consensus based German guidelines

BACKGROUND

Nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI) is a frequent and clinically relevant phenomenon in adolescence. Within Europe, Germany has one of the highest prevalence rates in youth with lifetime prevalence ranging between 25 and 35%. However, treatment guidelines for NSSI are not yet available.

METHODS

Consensus based clinical guidelines were created by a working group consisting of members of eleven medical, psychological or psychotherapeutic professional national associations, and two members of patient self-help and prevention groups. The guidelines were developed in consecutive expert meetings and literature searches and agreed on in a final consensus conference.

RESULTS

Given that evidence on both the psychotherapeutic and psychopharmacological treatment of NSSI is limited, a consensus based approach was chosen. The consensus indicated that due to the accumulating evidence on the efficacy of psychotherapeutic approaches, core elements of psychotherapy should be provided in treatment of NSSI. A specific psychopharmacological therapy of NSSI cannot be recommended. In addition, the guidelines provide recommendations for surgical intervention of NSSI.

CONCLUSIONS

In accordance with the heterogeneous level of evidence, recommendations for the clinical management of NSSI in adolescence were made during a consensus conference after reviewing available literature. There is still a lack of knowledge on prevention as well as clinical interventions, which needs to be addressed by further clinically relevant studies.