Pharmacological treatment of acute agitation associated with psychotic and bipolar disorder: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There are no recommendations based on the efficacy of specific drugs for the treatment of psychotic depression. To address this evidence gap, we did a network meta-analysis to assess and compare the efficacy and safety of pharmacological treatments for psychotic depression.

METHODS

In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we searched ClinicalTrials.gov, CENTRAL, Embase, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to Nov 23, 2023 for randomised controlled trials published in any language that assessed pharmacological treatments for individuals of any age with a diagnosis of a major depressive episode with psychotic features, in the context of major depressive disorder or bipolar disorder in any setting. We excluded continuation or maintenance trials. We screened the study titles and abstracts identified, and we extracted data from relevant studies after full-text review. If full data were not available, we requested data from study authors twice. We analysed treatments for individual drugs (or drug combinations) and by grouping them on the basis of mechanisms of action. The primary outcomes were response rate (ie, the proportion of participants who responded to treatment) and acceptability (ie, the proportion who discontinued treatment for any reason). We calculated risk ratios and did separate frequentist network meta-analyses by using random-effects models. The risk of bias of individual studies was assessed with the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool and the confidence in the evidence with the Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis (CINeMA). This study was registered with PROSPERO, CRD42023392926.

FINDINGS

Of 6313 reports identified, 16 randomised controlled trials were included in the systematic review, and 14 were included in the network meta-analyses. The 16 trials included 1161 people with psychotic depression (mean age 50·5 years [SD 11·4]). 516 (44·4%) participants were female and 422 (36·3%) were male; sex data were not available for the other 223 (19·2%). 489 (42·1%) participants were White, 47 (4·0%) were African American, and 12 (1·0%) were Asian; race or ethnicity data were not available for the other 613 (52·8%). Only the combination of fluoxetine plus olanzapine was associated with a higher proportion of participants with a treatment response compared with placebo (risk ratio 1·91 [95% CI 1·27-2·85]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes compared with placebo. When treatments were grouped by mechanism of action, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor with a second-generation antipsychotic was associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses than was placebo (1·89 [1·17-3·04]), with no differences in terms of safety outcomes. In head-to-head comparisons of active treatments, a significantly higher proportion of participants had a response to amitriptyline plus perphenazine (3·61 [1·23-10·56]) and amoxapine (3·14 [1·01-9·80]) than to perphenazine, and to fluoxetine plus olanzapine compared with olanzapine alone (1·60 [1·09-2·34]). Venlafaxine, venlafaxine plus quetiapine (2·25 [1·09-4·63]), and imipramine (1·95 [1·01-3·79]) were also associated with a higher proportion of treatment responses overall. In head-to-head comparisons grouped by mechanism of action, antipsychotic plus antidepressant combinations consistently outperformed monotherapies from either drug class in terms of the proportion of participants with treatment responses. Heterogeneity was low. No high-risk instances were identified in the bias assessment for our primary outcomes.

INTERPRETATION

According to the available evidence, the combination of a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor and a second-generation antipsychotic-and particularly of fluoxetine and olanzapine-could be the optimal treatment choice for psychotic depression. These findings should be taken into account in the development of clinical practice guidelines. However, these conclusions should be interpreted cautiously in view of the low number of included studies and the limitations of these studies.

FUNDING

None.

Improving the pharmacotherapeutic treatment of agitation associated with bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Agitation is commonly encountered in people with bipolar disorder, particularly when experiencing a manic episode. The number of approved pharmacological agents to manage acute episodes of agitation in this population is limited.

AREAS COVERED

A search was conducted using the US National Library of Medicine PubMed.gov resource for English-language papers of clinical trials and reviews/meta-analyses, using the text words 'bipolar disorder' AND 'agitation,' as well as any papers with both two text words in the title, without any date restrictions.

EXPERT OPINION

Existing pharmacologic options approved by regulatory authorities for the treatment of acute episodes of agitation associated with bipolar disorder have similar degrees of efficacy but differ in their tolerability profiles and ease of use, giving clinicians an opportunity to individualize treatment. The goal is to treat mild-moderate agitation before it evolves into severe agitation, encouraging noninvasive pharmacologic treatment options. Inhaled loxapine and sublingual dexmedetomidine are newer options with rapid onset of action and may be preferable for patients willing to cooperate with treatment.

Intranasal administration of olanzapine has beneficial outcome in a rat activity-based anorexia model

The atypical antipsychotic drug olanzapine is prescribed despite clinical studies on olanzapine treatment showing mixed results on treatment efficacy in anorexia nervosa. We investigated the effect of systemic and intranasal administration of olanzapine in the activity-based anorexia (ABA) model. Rats were habituated to a running wheel and exposed to the ABA model while treated with olanzapine. During ABA rats had 1.5 h of daily access to food and ad libitum access to a running wheel for seven consecutive days. Olanzapine was administered via an osmotic minipump (1, 2.75, and 7.5 mg/kg) or intranasally 2 h before dark onset (1 and 2.75 mg/kg). We monitored body weight, food intake, wheel revolutions, body temperature, and adipose tissue. We found 2.75 and 7.5 mg/kg systemic olanzapine decreased wheel revolutions during ABA. Relative adipose tissue mass was increased in the 7.5 mg/kg olanzapine-treated group while body weight, food intake, and body temperature were unaltered by the systemic olanzapine. 1 and 2.75 mg/kg intranasal olanzapine diminished wheel revolutions and body temperature during the first 2 h after administration. The intranasal olanzapine-treated rats had a higher body weight at the end of ABA. We find that olanzapine has beneficial outcomes in the ABA via two administration routes by acting mainly on running wheel activity. Intranasal olanzapine showed a rapid effect in the first hours after administration in reducing locomotor activity. We recommend further exploring intranasal administration of olanzapine in anorectic patients to assist them in coping with restlessness.

Considering Loxapine Instead of Clozapine: A Case Series and Literature Review

This case series highlights the importance of loxapine in psychiatric disorders when clozapine is unable to control agitation and psychotic symptoms due to medication noncompliance, intolerable side effects, or inadequate clinical outcomes. Loxapine is classified as a first-generation typical antipsychotic but displays atypical antipsychotic-like characteristics with structural similarity to clozapine. However, since the inception of second-generation antipsychotic medications, the role of loxapine in modern psychiatric practice has become limited. Loxapine has been underutilized due to concerns of side effects and lack of in-depth research about its safety, tolerability, and efficacy. This report revisits loxapine’s clinical utility through two well-studied long-term inpatient cases, where it played a crucial role in controlling psychotic symptoms and achieving better medication compliance by eliminating significant barriers, including monitoring regular differential complete blood counts. We aim to add to the current evidence and literature about the advantage of using loxapine for specific clinical scenarios in psychiatric practice.

Which Emergent Medication Should I Give Next? Repeated Use of Emergent Medications to Treat Acute Agitation

Agitation is a common symptom encountered among patients treated in psychiatric emergency settings. While there are many guidelines available for initial management of the acutely agitated patient, there is a notable dearth of guidelines that delineate recommended approaches to the acutely agitated patient in whom an initial medication intervention has failed. This manuscript aims to fill this gap by examining evidence available in the literature and providing clinical algorithms suggested by the authors for sequential medication administration in patients with persistent acute agitation in psychiatric emergency settings. We discuss risk factors for medication-related adverse events and provide options for patients who are able to take oral medications and for patients who require parenteral intervention. We conclude with a discussion of the current need for well-designed studies that examine sequential medication options in patients with persistent acute agitation.

How to treat mania

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we aimed at reviewing evidence-based treatment options for bipolar mania and proposed tentative evidence-based clinical suggestions regarding the management of a manic episode, especially regarding the choice of the proper mood stabilizer and antipsychotic medication.

METHOD

A narrative review was undertaken addressing 'treatment of bipolar mania'. Findings have been synthesized and incorporated with clinical experience into a model to support different treatment choices.

RESULTS

To date, there is solid evidence supporting the use of several medications, such as lithium, divalproex, and carbamazepine, and antipsychotics, such as chlorpromazine, haloperidol, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, aripiprazole, inhaled loxapine, asenapine, and cariprazine in acute mania, and some evidence supporting the use of clozapine or electroconvulsive therapy in treatment-refractory cases. However, in clinical practice, when making decisions about treatment, personalized treatment is needed, according to the different clinical presentations and more complex clinical situations within the manic episode and considering a long-term view and with the objective of not only a symptomatic but also functional recovery. After remission from acute mania, psychoeducation strategies are useful to ensure adherence.

DISCUSSION

Despite the evidence forefficacy of many currently available treatments for mania, the majority of RCTs provide little direction for the clinician as to what steps might be optimal in different presentations of mania as well as in the presence of specific patient characteristics. Manic episodes should be managed on a personalized basis considering the clinical course and patient criteria and with the expectation of maintaining that treatment in the long-term.

The Added Value of Liquid Antipsychotics: The Case of Quetiapine

Background:

Antipsychotic drugs are the cornerstone of schizophrenia treatment and are also indicated for other psychotic and mood disorders. Different antipsychotic drugs and their formulations are available, though liquid forms have been overlooked.

Methods

Herein the added value of liquid antipsychotics is reviewed, with a focus on the recently introduced liquid quetiapine, a frequently used antipsychotic.

Results

Liquid antipsychotics are easily administrated via the preferable oral route, while compliance under supervised administration is transparent. Liquid forms could be preferred in patients with swallowing difficulties, which are common in elderly patients and often concealed. In this population, the availability of liquid antipsychotics could prevent errors in medication administration, which could possibly render caregivers labile to any harm caused to the patient. Aspiration, however, remains a risk with liquid formulations. Common errors in medication administration are the omission of treatment and alteration of solid oral formulations. Regarding quetiapine, omission of treatment could be associated with non-adherence as well as discontinuation symptoms, while alteration of extended release formulation could alter its pharmacokinetics. Mildly agitated and cooperative patients are another target population of liquid antipsychotics, which can induce fast sedation avoiding involuntary intramuscular injections. The combination of sedative properties and low incidence of extrapyramidal symptoms makes liquid quetiapine a valuable option for these patients, yet the current evidence is limited.

Conclusion

The liquid form of quetiapine can facilitate pharmacotherapy of schizophrenia and can be defined as value added medicine bringing key benefits not only to the patients and caregivers but also to the health care system.

The Upper Nasal Space—A Novel Delivery Route Ideal for Central Nervous System Drugs

Collapse

Trends in pharmacological emergency treatment of patients suffering from schizophrenia over a 16-year observation period

Patients suffering from schizophrenia are often treated in locked psychiatric units because of psychomotor agitation, hostility and aggressive behavior, or suicidality. Because of legal conditions, investigations on these acutely ill patients are difficult, and many studies do not represent 'real-life psychiatry'. This retrospective survey was conducted at the Department of Psychiatry, Psychotherapy and Psychosomatics of the Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria. Data were collected from the records of all adult inpatients suffering from a schizophrenia spectrum disorder according to the International Classification of Diseases, 10th ed. (ICD-10) (F2x) who had been admitted to a locked unit in 1997, 2002, 2007, and 2012. In addition to demographic data, diagnoses at the time of admission, length of stay at the locked unit, and psychopharmacological treatment (3 h before and following admission) were recorded. The mean length of stay at a locked unit decreased significantly from 11.8±4.43 days (mean±SD) in 1997 to 8.5±12.96 days (mean±SD) in 2012. The use of antipsychotics decreased nonsignificantly from 1997 to 2012. Despite an increasing use of second compared with first-generation antipsychotic drugs over the course of time, haloperidol was the most frequently used single compound in all investigated years except 2012. The majority of medications were administered orally. The use of benzodiazepines did not change substantially over the course of time. All in all, pharmacological emergency treatment of patients suffering from schizophrenia spectrum disorders in locked units was in line with current treatment guidelines, which recommend the use of second-generation antipsychotic drugs, monotherapy, oral application, and cautious dosing.

PLACID study: A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine versus intramuscular aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

The aim of the study was to investigate the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine compared with the intramuscular (IM) antipsychotic aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder. PLACID was an assessor-blind, parallel-group trial conducted in 23 centres in the Czech Republic, Germany, Spain, and Russia. Patients (aged 18-65 years) diagnosed with schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder experiencing acute agitation (Clinical Global Impression [CGI]-Severity score ≥ 4) while hospitalized or attending an emergency room were randomized to receive up to two doses of inhaled loxapine 9.1 mg or IM aripiprazole 9.75 mg (≥ 2 h between doses) during the 24-h study period. The primary efficacy endpoint was time to response (CGI-Improvement score 1 [very much improved] or 2 [much improved]). The primary analysis included randomized patients who provided informed consent (full analysis set [FAS]); the safety analysis included all patients who received study medication. The FAS comprised 357 patients (enrolled December 2, 2014 - October 31, 2016). The between-treatment difference in median time to CGI-Improvement response was 10 min (95% CI 0.0-30.0); p = 0.0005) in favour of inhaled loxapine (median [95% CI]: 50 min [30.0-50.0] vs 60 min [50.0-90.0] with IM aripiprazole); the difference was significant at 10 min (responders: 14% [loxapine] vs 4% [aripiprazole]; p = 0.001). There were no safety issues. Inhaled loxapine reduced agitation faster than IM aripiprazole, supporting its use as a first-line option for managing acute agitation in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

Systematic review: human gut dysbiosis induced by non-antibiotic prescription medications

BACKGROUND

Global prescription drug use has been increasing continuously for decades. The gut microbiome, a key contributor to health status, can be altered by prescription drug use, as antibiotics have been repeatedly described to have both short-term and long-standing effects on the intestinal microbiome.

AIM

To summarise current findings on non-antibiotic prescription-induced gut microbiome changes, focusing on the most frequently prescribed therapeutic drug categories.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review by first searching in online databases for indexed articles and abstracts in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Studies assessing the intestinal microbiome alterations associated with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs), metformin, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), opioids, statins and antipsychotics were included. We only included studies using culture-independent molecular techniques.

RESULTS

Proton pump inhibitors and antipsychotic medications are associated with a decrease in α diversity in the gut microbiome, whereas opioids were associated with an increase in α diversity. Metformin and NSAIDs were not associated with significant changes in α diversity. β diversity was found to be significantly altered with all drugs, except for NSAIDs. PPI use was linked to a decrease in Clotridiales and increase in Actinomycetales, Micrococcaceae and Streptococcaceae, which are changes previously implicated in dysbiosis and increased susceptibility to Clostridium difficile infection. Consistent results showed that PPIs, metformin, NSAIDs, opioids and antipsychotics were either associated with increases in members of class Gammaproteobacteria (including Enterobacter, Escherichia, Klebsiella and Citrobacter), or members of family Enterococcaceae, which are often pathogens isolated from bloodstream infections in critically ill patients. We also found that antipsychotic treatment, usually associated with an increase in body mass index, was marked by a decreased ratio of Bacteroidetes:Firmicutes in the gut microbiome, resembling trends seen in obese patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-antibiotic prescription drugs have a notable impact on the overall architecture of the intestinal microbiome. Further explorations should seek to define biomarkers of dysbiosis induced by specific drugs, and potentially tailor live biotherapeutics to counter this drug-induced dysbiosis. Many other frequently prescribed drugs should also be investigated to better understand the link between these drugs, the microbiome and health status.

Spontaneous recovery of traumatic brain injury-induced functional deficits is not hindered by daily administration of lorazepam

Agitation and aggression are common sequelae of traumatic brain injury (TBI) and pose a challenge to physicians and other health providers during acute patient care and subsequent neurorehabilitation. Antipsychotic drugs (APDs) are routinely administered to manage TBI patients displaying such maladaptive behaviors despite several clinical and preclinical studies demonstrating that they hinder recovery. A potentially viable alternative to APDs may be the benzodiazepines, which have differing mechanisms of action. Hence, the aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that lorazepam (LOR) would not impede recovery after TBI. Anesthetized adult male rats received a cortical impact or sham injury and then were intraperitoneally administered LOR (0.1mg/kg, 1.0mg/kg, or 2.0mg/kg) or vehicle (VEH; 1mL/kg) commencing 24-h after surgery and once daily for 19days. Motor and cognitive outcomes were assessed on post-operative days 1-5 and 14-19, respectively. No differences were revealed among the four sham control groups and thus they were pooled into one inclusive SHAM group. The SHAMs performed better than all TBI groups on all assessments (p<0.05). Regarding TBI, the 2.0mg/kg LOR group performed better than the VEH and 0.1mg/kg or 1.0mg/kg LOR groups on every task (p<0.05); no differences were observed among the latter three groups on any endpoint (p>0.05). Overall, these preclinical behavioral data support the hypothesis and reveal a therapeutic benefit with the higher dose of LOR. The findings suggest that LOR may be an alternative, to APDs, for controlling agitation without compromising spontaneous recovery and perhaps could afford a dual benefit by also promoting therapeutic efficacy.

Have antipsychotics a different speed of action in the acute treatment of mania? A single-blind comparative study

Available antipsychotics show different efficacy on manic symptoms of bipolar patients, but few studies have investigated the speed of action of the various compounds. For this reason, purpose of the present paper was to compare antipsychotic mono-therapies in terms of speed of action in a sample of manic bipolar patients. In total, 155 bipolar patients, treated with antipsychotic mono-therapy and followed-up in Inpatient Psychiatry Clinic of University of Milan, were included in this single-blind comparative study. Clinical response was defined as a reduction of Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) scores ⩾50%, while remission as a YMRS score <10. After 4 days patients who had been treated with asenapine, were more likely to have achieved a clinical response than those in treatment with haloperidol ( p = 0.001). After 7 days, a more frequent clinical response was achieved by patients treated with asenapine than those who had been treated with haloperidol ( p < 0.001) or olanzapine ( p = 0.047). Asenapine appears to be faster in determining treatment response in manic patients compared with haloperidol and less markedly with olanzapine.

Efficacy, safety and tolerability of aripiprazole in bipolar disorder: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Numerous studies have investigated aripiprazole as a treatment for bipolar disorder (BD). therefore we conducted this comprehensive meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety profile of aripiprazole in treating BD. Two authors conducted systematic searches of PubMed and ScienceDirect from inception until May 14th, 2017. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of people with BD who received aripiprazole were included. A total of 20 RCTs met the eligibility criteria, including two which investigated the efficacy of aripiprazole versus haloperidol (aripiprazole=340; haloperidol=337), three which compared aripiprazole versus lithium (aripiprazole=208; lithium=212), and 15 with multiple comparisons of aripiprazole versus a placebo (aripiprazole=1923; placebo=1499). Compared to a placebo, aripiprazole improved acute mania (Hedges' g: -0.299, p=0.001) and psychosis (Hedges' g: -0.296, p<0.001) in the acute mania state, but did not improve depressive symptoms (Hedges' g: -0.127, p=0.054) in the acute depressive state. Aripiprazole was associated with lower relapse rates in bipolar mania when used in combination versus a placebo in maintenance therapy (odds ratio: 0.522, p<0.029). Aripiprazole was also associated with higher levels of high density lipoprotein, lower dropout rates, but no difference in extrapyramidal symptoms in the maintenance phase versus a placebo or in comparison with other medications (haloperidol or lithium). Our results suggest that aripiprazole is effective and safe in treating bipolar mania. Further trials are necessary to evaluate the efficacy and tolerability versus other medications.

Rationale and design of the PLACID study: a randomised trial comparing the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine versus IM aripiprazole in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

The management of acute agitation manifesting in patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder requires swift pharmacological intervention to provide rapid symptomatic relief and prevent escalation to aggression and violence. Antipsychotic medications are widely used in this setting and the availability of an inhaled formulation with deep lung absorption of the antipsychotic loxapine has the potential to deliver a faster onset of therapeutic effect than the available intramuscular formulations of antipsychotics.

METHODS

The efficacy of inhaled loxapine and the alternative antipsychotic aripiprazole delivered via intramuscular (IM) injection will be compared in the Phase IIIb PLACID study. Adults (18-65 years) with a confirmed diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar I disorder presenting with acute agitation will be randomly assigned to open-label treatment in a 1:1 ratio. Clinical evaluation will be conducted by raters blinded to treatment assignment. The primary efficacy endpoint is time to response (defined as a Clinical Global Impression of Improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 [very much improved] or 2 [much improved]). Secondary endpoints will include the percentage of responders at different time points after dosing; the proportion of patients who receive 1 or 2 doses of study drug; time to second dose; time to rescue medication; satisfaction with study drug (evaluated using Item 14 of the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication); and safety and tolerability. Approximately 360 patients will be recruited with an interim analysis conducted once 180 patients have completed the study to decide whether to stop for futility or continue with or without an increase in the sample size up to additional 288 patients.

DISCUSSION

The PLACID trial will assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled loxapine with deep lung absorption compared with the IM antipsychotic, aripiprazole, in acutely agitated patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. In the event that the median time to response of inhaled loxapine is significantly shorter than that of the intramuscular aripiprazole, the PLACID study has the potential to support the inhaled antipsychotic therapy as the standard of care in this setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered with the European Clinical Trials Database on the 31 October 2014 (EudraCT number 2014-000456-29 ).

Treatment recommendations for DSM-5-defined mixed features

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) mixed features specifier provides a less restrictive definition of mixed mood states, compared to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), including mood episodes that manifest with subthreshold symptoms of the opposite mood state. A limited number of studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments specifically for DSM-5-defined mixed features in mood disorders. As such, there is currently an inadequate amount of data to appropriately inform evidence-based treatment guidelines of DSM-5 defined mixed features. However, given the high prevalence and morbidity of mixed features, treatment recommendations based on the currently available evidence along with expert opinion may be of benefit. This article serves to provide these interim treatment recommendations while humbly acknowledging the limited amount of evidence currently available. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) appear to have the greatest promise in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) with mixed features. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (ie, lithium and divalproex) may also be of benefit; however, they have been inadequately studied. In the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features, the comparable efficacy of antidepressants versus other treatments, such as SGAs, remains unknown. As such, antidepressants remain first-line treatment of MDD with or without mixed features; however, there are significant safety concerns associated with antidepressant monotherapy when mixed features are present, which merits increased monitoring. Lurasidone is the only SGA monotherapy that has been shown to be efficacious specifically in the treatment of MDD with mixed features. Further research is needed to accurately determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for mood episodes with mixed features to adequately inform future treatment guidelines.

Effects of asenapine on agitation and hostility in adults with acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is associated with an increased risk of aggression. However, effective management of hostility and/or agitation symptoms may prevent patients from becoming violent. This analysis investigated the efficacy of the antipsychotic asenapine on hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder.

METHODS

Data were pooled from three randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase III trials of asenapine in adults with manic or mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder (NCT00159744, NCT00159796, and NCT00764478). Post hoc analyses assessed the changes from baseline to day 21 on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) hostility-related item scores in asenapine- or placebo-treated patients with at least minimal or mild symptom severity and on the PANSS-excited component (PANSS-EC) total score in agitated patients. Changes were adjusted for improvements in overall mania symptoms to investigate direct effects on hostility.

RESULTS

Significantly greater changes in favor of asenapine versus placebo were observed in YMRS hostility-related item scores (irritability: least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval] =-0.5 [-0.87, -0.22], P=0.001; disruptive-aggressive behavior: -0.7 [-0.99, -0.37], P<0.0001), PANSS hostility item score (-0.2 [-0.44, -0.04]; P=0.0181), and PANSS-EC total score (-1.4 [-2.4, -0.4]; P=0.0055). Changes in the YMRS disruptive-aggressive behavior score and the sum of the hostility-related items remained significant after adjusting for improvements in other YMRS item scores.

CONCLUSION

Asenapine significantly reduced hostility and agitation in patients with bipolar I disorder; improvement was at least partially independent of overall improvement on mania symptoms.