Pharmakologische Behandlung der bipolaren Depression

[German S3 guidelines on bipolar disorders-first update 2019 : What is new in pharmacotherapy?]

BACKGROUND

German S3 guidelines are subject to the highest methodological standards. This includes that they are only valid for a certain time period. Following the first edition in 2012 the first update of the S3 guidelines on bipolar disorder has now been published (2019).

OBJECTIVE

What has changed in the field of pharmacological recommendations comparing the first edition with the update in 2019?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Comparison of the 1st edition from 2012 with the update from 2019 of the S3 guidelines for the diagnostics and treatment of bipolar disorders.

RESULTS

The three principle treatment targets of acute treatment of bipolar depression, acute treatment of mania and phase prophylaxis (maintenance treatment) can be distinguished. For acute treatment of bipolar depression, for the first time a medication has received a level A recommendation: quetiapine. For the acute treatment of mania, several drugs are still recommended with the same level of recommendation (B). Asenapine has been added as the tenth substance. Lithium is still the only drug with a level A recommendation for maintenance and prophylactic treatment and is also the only drug approved for this indication without restrictions. A new recommendation is that in the absence of contraindications, phase prophylaxis with a serum level of at least 0.6 mmol/l should be carried out. With a B recommendation, quetiapine has been added to the drugs for phase prophylactic treatment.

CONCLUSION

The S3 guidelines make recommendations at the highest scientific level. In view of these findings, lithium is clearly underutilized for maintenance therapy. In the absence of clear contraindications (advanced renal insufficiency), every patient with bipolar disease should be given the chance of lithium prophylaxis for an adequately long period.

[Is there an increased risk for renal tumors during long-term treatment with lithium?]

Lithium salts are the recommended first-line treatment (gold standard) in national and international treatment guidelines for acute and maintenance treatment of affective disorders, such as bipolar disorders. Lithium has also been shown to have a unique protective effect against suicide in patients suffering from affective disorders. Despite the well-known acute and long-term adverse effects lithium therapy can be safely administered if patients are properly educated and carefully monitored. A recent study from France now shows that patients with severely impaired renal function who had been treated with lithium salts for more than 10 years could have an increased risk for kidney tumors (benign and malignant). This resulted in an adjustment concerning information within the package leaflet by European authorities. The authors of this article reflect the currently available data in order to better understand and handle this new finding and to warn about uncritical reactions including withdrawal of lithium in successfully treated patients. This article provides clinical recommendations to provide further insight relating to the risk of kidney cancer in long-term lithium therapy.

Treatment patterns and characteristics of older antipsychotic users in Germany

The aim of this study was to investigate the characteristics and treatment patterns of older antipsychotic (AP) users in Germany. We carried out a cohort study in the German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database and identified new AP users aged at least 65 years between 2005 and 2011. Possible indications, comedication, and information on persistence and adherence, concurrent multiple use, and switch of APs were assessed. Overall, 298,847 individuals were included in the cohort. Almost 70% entered the cohort with a typical antipsychotic (TAP). Melperone (23.4%) was used most frequently, followed by promethazine (18.3%), sulpiride (11.0%), and risperidone (10.3%). AP users had a low prevalence of schizophrenia and bipolar disorders in contrast to dementia. Initiators of atypical antipsychotics had more treatment episodes compared with TAPs (median 3 vs. 2), but lower median persistence (14 vs. 22 days). Persistence was also lower in patients with, rather than without, dementia. The overall percentage of concurrent multiple use and switch to other APs was low with 5.6%, but higher in patients with, rather than without, dementia. In conclusion, APs were used for a broad range of indications, mostly other than schizophrenia and bipolar disorders. Low persistence and a high number of treatment episodes suggest frequent 'as-needed' treatment, especially in dementia patients.