Bipolar depression: an evidence-based approach

Clinical and psychopathological features associated with treatment-emergent mania in bipolar-II depressed outpatients exposed to antidepressants

BACKGROUND

Treatment-emergent affective switch (TEAS), including treatment-emergent mania (TEM), carry significant burden in the clinical management of bipolar depression, whereas the use of antidepressants raises both efficacy, safety and tolerability concerns. The present study assesses the prevalence and clinical correlates of TEM in selected sample of Bipolar Disorder (BD) Type-II (BD-II) acute depression outpatients.

METHODS

Post-hoc analysis of the clinical and psychopathological features associated with TEM among 91 BD-II depressed outpatients exposed to antidepressants.

RESULTS

Second-generation antipsychotics (SGA) (p = .005), lithium (≤ .001), cyclothymic/irritable/hyperthymic temperaments (p = ≤ .001; p = .001; p = .003, respectively), rapid-cycling (p = .005) and depressive mixed features (p = .003) differed between TEM⁺ cases vs. TEM^- controls. Upon multinomial logistic regression, the accounted psychopathological features correctly classified as much as 88.6% of TEM⁺ cases (35/91 overall sample, or 38.46% of the sample), yet not statistically significantly [Exp(B) = .032; p = ns]. Specifically, lithium [B = - 2.385; p = .001], SGAs [B = - 2.354; p = .002] predicted lower rates of TEM⁺ in contrast to the number of lifetime previous psychiatric hospitalizations [B = 2.380; p = .002], whereas mixed features did not [B = 1.267; p = ns].

LIMITATIONS

Post-hoc analysis. Lack of systematic pharmacological history record; chance of recall bias and Berkson's biases. Permissive operational criterion for TEM. Relatively small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Cyclothymic temperament and mixed depression discriminated TEM⁺ between TEM^- cases, although only lithium and the SGAs reliably predicted TEM^+/- grouping. Larger-sampled/powered longitudinal replication studies are warranted to allow firm conclusions on the matter, ideally contributing to the identification of clear-cut sub-phenotypes of BD towards patient-tailored-pharmacotherapy.

Lurasidone in the Treatment of Bipolar Depression: Systematic Review of Systematic Reviews

INTRODUCTION

A burgeoning number of systematic reviews considering lurasidone in the treatment of bipolar depression have occurred since its Food and Drug Administration extended approval in 2013. While a paucity of available quantitative evidence still precludes preliminary meta-analysis on the matter, the present quality assessment of systematic review of systematic reviews, nonetheless, aims at highlighting current essential information on the topic.

METHODS

Both published and unpublished systematic reviews about lurasidone mono- or adjunctive therapy in the treatment of bipolar depression were searched by two independent authors inquiring PubMed/Cochrane/Embase/Scopus from inception until October 2016.

RESULTS

Twelve included systematic reviews were of moderate-to-high quality and consistent in covering the handful of RCTs available to date, suggesting the promising efficacy, safety, and tolerability profile of lurasidone. Concordance on the drug profile seems to be corroborated by a steadily increasing number of convergent qualitative reports on the matter.

LIMITATIONS

Publication, sponsorship, language, citation, and measurement biases.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite being preliminary in nature, this overview stipulates the effectiveness of lurasidone in the acute treatment of Type I bipolar depression overall. As outlined by most of the reviewed evidence, recommendations for future research should include further controlled trials of extended duration.

Prescribing patterns of antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood stabilizers in bipolar patients misdiagnosed with major depressive disorder in China

OBJECTIVE

Bipolar disorder (BD) is frequently misdiagnosed as major depressive disorder (MDD), which may lead to inappropriate treatment and poor outcomes. This study aimed to examine prescribing patterns of antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood stabilizers in BD patients misdiagnosed with MDD in China.

METHODS

A total of 1487 patients originally diagnosed with MDD were consecutively screened for diagnostic revision in 13 psychiatric hospitals or psychiatric units of general hospitals in China nationwide. The patients' sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were recorded using a standardized protocol and data collection procedure. The Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI) was used to establish DSM-IV diagnoses. Data on psychotropic prescriptions were collected by a review of medical records.

RESULTS

Three hundred and nine of the 1487 patients (20.8%) fulfilled DSM-IV criteria for BD; 118 (7.9%) for BD-I and 191 (12.8%) for BD-II on the MINI. Of the BD patients (n = 309), 227 (73.5%) received any use of antidepressants, 73 (23.6%) antipsychotics and 33 (10.7%) mood stabilizers. In multiple logistic regression analyses, compared with those with MDD, patients with BD-I were more likely to receive antidepressants (OR 1.7, 95% CI 1.1-2.8, p = 0.02), antipsychotics (OR 1.6, 95% CI 1.04-2.5, p = 0.04) and mood stabilizers (OR 3.9, 95% CI 2.1-7.2, p < 0.001), whereas patients with BD-II were more likely to receive mood stabilizers (OR 2.4, 95% CI 1.3-4.4, p = 0.003). There was no difference in the use of antidepressants (OR 1.1, 95% CI 0.8-1.5, p = 0.7) and antipsychotics (OR 1.3, 95% CI 0.9-1.9, p = 0.2) between BD-II and MDD. In addition, there was no difference between BD-I and BD-II in any use of antidepressants, antipsychotics and mood stabilizers.

CONCLUSIONS

The prescription of antidepressants for BD patients misdiagnosed with MDD is very common, and only a very small proportion of patients received guideline-concordant treatment. Considering the potentially hazardous effects of inappropriate pharmacotherapy in this population, continuing education and training addressing the correct diagnosis of BD and rational use of psychotropic medications are needed in China.

Evidence-based options for treatment-resistant adult bipolar disorder patients

OBJECTIVES

Many patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) respond incompletely or unsatisfactorily to available treatments. Given the potentially devastating nature of this prevalent disorder, there is a pressing need to improve clinical care of such patients.

METHODS

We performed a literature review of the research findings related to treatment-resistant BD reported through February 2012.

RESULTS

Therapeutic trials for treatment-resistant bipolar mania are uncommon, and provide few promising leads other than the use of clozapine. Far more pressing challenges are the depressive-dysthymic-dysphoric-mixed phases of BD and long-term prophylaxis. Therapeutic trials for treatment-resistant bipolar depression have assessed anticonvulsants, modern antipsychotics, glutamate [N-methyl-D-aspartate (NMDA)] antagonists, dopamine agonists, calcium-channel blockers, and thyroid hormones, as well as behavioral therapy, sleep deprivation, light therapy, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), transcranial magnetic stimulation, and deep brain stimulation-all of which are promising but limited in effectiveness. Several innovative pharmacological treatments (an anticholinesterase, a glutamine antagonist, a calcium-channel blocker, triiodothyronine, olanzapine and topiramate), ECT, and cognitive-behavior therapy have some support for long-term treatment of resistant BD patients, but most of trials of these treatments have been methodologically limited.

CONCLUSIONS

Most studies identified were small, involved supplementation of typically complex ongoing treatments, varied in controls, randomization, and blinding, usually involved brief follow-up, and lacked replication. Clearer criteria for defining and predicting treatment resistance in BD are needed, as well as improved trial design with better controls, assessment of specific clinical subgroups, and longer follow-up.