Comparative efficacy of lithium and amitriptyline in the maintenance treatment of recurrent unipolar depression: a randomised study

Twenty-Three Years of Declining Lithium Use: Analysis of a Pharmacoepidemiological Dataset from German-Speaking Countries

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacoepidemiological data suggest that lithium prescriptions for bipolar disorder are gradually decreasing, with less attention having been paid to other indications.

METHODS

We examined lithium prescriptions between 1994 and 2017 in data provided by the Drug Safety in Psychiatry Program AMSP, including psychiatric hospitals in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. We compared lithium use for different diagnoses before and after 2001 and in three periods (T1: 1994-2001, T2: 2002-2009, and T3: 2010-2017).

RESULTS

In a total of 158,384 adult inpatients (54% female, mean age 47.4±17.0 years), we observed a statistically significant decrease in lithium prescriptions between 1994-2000 and 2001-2017 in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder from 7.7% to 5.1% and in patients with affective disorders from 16.8% to 9.6%. Decreases in use were also observed for diagnostic subgroups: schizoaffective disorder (ICD-10 F25: 27.8% to 17.4%), bipolar disorder (F31: 41.3% to 31%), depressive episode (F32: 8.1% to 3.4%), recurrent depression (F33: 17.9% to 7.5%, all: p<0.001) and emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder (6.3% to 3.9%, p=0.01). The results in T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 were for F25: 26.7% vs. 18.2% vs. 16.2%, F32: 7.7% vs. 4.2% vs. 2.7%, F33: 17.2% vs. 8.6% vs. 6.6% and for F31: 40.8% vs. 31.7% vs 30.0%, i. e. there was no further decrease for lithium use in bipolar disorder after 2002. Lithium's main psychotropic co-medications were quetiapine (21.1%), lorazepam (20.6%), and olanzapine (15.2%).

DISCUSSION

In inpatients, the use of lithium has decreased in patients with bipolar disorder and also with various other psychiatric diagnoses.

Pharmacological and Somatic Treatment Effects on Suicide in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

Suicide is a public health crisis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacologic and somatic therapies on suicide risk.

Methods

A systematic search of MEDLINE for studies evaluating the effects of pharmacologic (excluding antidepressants) or somatic interventions on suicide risk was conducted. Studies were included if they used a comparison group, reported on suicide death, assessed a psychopharmacological or somatic intervention, and included adults. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fifty-seven studies were included from 2940 reviewed citations.

Results

In bipolar disorder, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to active controls (odds ratio [OR] = .58, p = .005; k = 12) and compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .46, p = .009; k = 9). In mixed diagnostic samples, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .27, p < .001; k = 12), but not compared to active controls (OR = .89, p = .468; k = 7). In psychotic disorders, clozapine was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide (OR = .46, p = .007; k = 7). Associations between suicide death and electroconvulsive therapy (OR = .77, p = .053; k = 11), non-clozapine antipsychotics in bipolar disorder (OR = .73, p = .090; k = 6) and antipsychotics in psychotic disorders (OR = .39, p = .069; k = 6) were not significant. There was no consistent relationship between antiepileptic mood stabilizers and suicide. There were insufficient studies to meta-analyze associations of suicide risk with vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, or transcranial direct current stimulation.

Conclusion

Lithium and clozapine have consistent data supporting protective effects against suicide in certain clinical contexts.Reprinted from Depress Anxiety 2022; 39:100-112, with permission from John Wiley and Sons. Copyright © 2022.

Pharmacological and somatic treatment effects on suicide in adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Suicide is a public health crisis. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effects of psychopharmacologic and somatic therapies on suicide risk.

METHODS

A systematic search of MEDLINE for studies evaluating the effects of pharmacologic (excluding antidepressants) or somatic interventions on suicide risk was conducted. Studies were included if they used a comparison group, reported on suicide death, assessed a psychopharmacological or somatic intervention, and included adults. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. Fifty-seven studies were included from 2940 reviewed citations.

RESULTS

In bipolar disorder, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to active controls (odds ratio [OR] = .58, p = .005; k = 12) and compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .46, p = .009; k = 9). In mixed diagnostic samples, lithium was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide compared to placebo/no lithium (OR = .27, p < .001; k = 12), but not compared to active controls (OR = .89, p = .468; k = 7). In psychotic disorders, clozapine was associated with a reduction in the odds of suicide (OR = .46, p = .007; k = 7). Associations between suicide death and electroconvulsive therapy (OR = .77, p = .053; k = 11), non-clozapine antipsychotics in bipolar disorder (OR = .73, p = .090; k = 6) and antipsychotics in psychotic disorders (OR = .39, p = .069; k = 6) were not significant. There was no consistent relationship between antiepileptic mood stabilizers and suicide. There were insufficient studies to meta-analyze associations of suicide risk with vagus nerve stimulation, transcranial magnetic stimulation, magnetic seizure therapy, or transcranial direct current stimulation.

CONCLUSION

Lithium and clozapine have consistent data supporting protective effects against suicide in certain clinical contexts.

Lithium treatment for unipolar major depressive disorder: Systematic review

BACKGROUND

The potential value of lithium treatment in particular aspects of unipolar major depressive disorder remains uncertain.

METHODS

With reports of controlled trials identified by systematic searching of Medline, Cochrane Library, and PsycINFO literature databases, we summarized responses with lithium and controls followed by selective random-effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

We identified 36 reports with 39 randomized controlled trials: six for monotherapy and 12 for adding lithium to antidepressants for acute major depression, and 21 for long-term treatment. Data for monotherapy of acute depression were few and inconclusive. As an adjunct to antidepressants, lithium was much more effective than placebo ( p<0.0001). For long-term maintenance treatment, lithium was more effective than placebo in monotherapy ( p=0.011) and to supplement antidepressants ( p=0.038), and indistinguishable from antidepressant monotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings indicate efficacy of lithium as a treatment for some aspects of major depressive disorder, especially as an add-on to antidepressants and for long-term prophylaxis. It remains uncertain whether some benefits of lithium treatment occur with many major depressive disorder patients, or if efficacy is particular to a subgroup with bipolar disorder-like characteristics or mixed-features.

How safe is lithium prescribing? Audit of a local prescribing framework and patient survey

Aims and Method

To examine the standards of lithium monitoring in eastern Hull following the introduction of a local prescribing framework, we investigated the biochemistry records of patients currently prescribed lithium, identified from primary care computerised records. A survey of patients' knowledge about lithium therapy was also conducted.

Results

Inadequate standards of lithium monitoring were demonstrated, with only 50% of patients having a level recorded during the preceding 3 months. Monitoring of thyroid and renal function was better, with two-thirds of patients tested in the past year. Patients' knowledge of the side-effects and risks of lithium was minimal; only 7 out of 27 patients questioned felt able to identify the signs of lithium toxicity; three-quarters of those surveyed felt they had not been given enough information about their medication.

Clinical Implications

The introduction of prescribing frameworks or other guidelines does not ensure good practice. Further actions may be needed to ensure lithium is prescribed safely, such as patient registers, monitoring cards and automatic recall systems. Education of patients and primary care staff about the safe use of psychotropic drugs needs to be an ongoing process.

The suicide prevention effect of lithium: more than 20 years of evidence-a narrative review

The management and treatment of patients with suicidal behavior is one of the most challenging tasks for health-care professionals. Patients with affective disorders are at high risk for suicidal behavior, therefore, should be a target for prevention. Numerous international studies of lithium use have documented anti-suicidal effects since the 1970s. Despite the unambiguous evidence of lithium’s anti-suicidal effects and recommendations in national and international guidelines for its use in acute and maintenance therapy of affective disorders, the use of lithium is still underrepresented. The following article provides a comprehensive review of studies investigating the anti-suicidal effect of lithium in patients with affective disorders.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) guidelines for biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders. part 2: maintenance treatment of major depressive disorder-update 2015

These guidelines for the treatment of unipolar depressive disorders systematically review available evidence pertaining to the biological treatment of patients with major depression and produce a series of practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful based on the available evidence. These guidelines are intended for use by all physicians assessing and treating patients with these conditions. The relevant data have been extracted primarily from various treatment guidelines and panels for depressive disorders, as well as from meta-analyses/reviews on the efficacy of antidepressant medications and other biological treatment interventions identified by a search of the MEDLINE database and Cochrane Library. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and was then categorized into five levels of evidence (CE A-F) and five levels of recommendation grades (RG 1-5). This second part of the WFSBP guidelines on depressive disorders covers the management of the maintenance phase treatment, and is primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including pharmacological and hormonal medications, electroconvulsive therapy and other brain stimulation treatments) of adults and also, albeit to a lesser extent, children, adolescents and older adults.

Impact of psychotropic drugs on suicide and suicidal behaviors

OBJECTIVE

To examine the impact of psychotropic drugs on suicide and suicidal behaviors in bipolar disorders.

METHODS

A Medline search of articles published from January 1960 to January 2013 was performed using relevant keywords to identify studies examining the relationship of psychotropic drugs to suicidal behaviors. The publications were further reviewed for relevant references and information. Additionally, the US Food and Drug Administration Center for Drug Evaluation Research website was searched.

RESULTS

The available studies used differing methodologies, making interpretation of the findings difficult. Studies suggest that antidepressants may increase suicidal risk in bipolar disorder, this possibly being related to the induction of broadly defined mixed states. There is no evidence that antiepileptic drugs as a class increase suicidal risk in patients with bipolar disorder. Only lithium provides convincing data that it reduces the risk of suicide over the long term. There is little known regarding the effects of antipsychotics, as well as anti-anxiety and hypnotic drugs, on suicidal behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence for the impact of psychotropics on suicidal risk in patients with bipolar disorder is largely methodologically flawed and, except for a few instances, clinically not useful at this point. Adequately powered, prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to assess the impact of each class of psychotropic and each psychotropic as well as common combination therapies. Until such studies have been carried out, clinicians are urged to exercise caution in using these drugs and rely on the traditional means of carefully assessing and monitoring patients with bipolar disorder who are at high risk for suicide.

Depressive Störungen

Das Spektrum depressiver Erkrankungen macht den Hauptteil affektiver Störungen aus und gehört mit einer Inzidenz von ca. 8–20% zu den häufigsten psychischen Erkrankungen. Depressionen werden nach wie vor zu selten einer adäquaten Therapie (Antidepressiva, störungsspezifische Psychotherapie wie z. B. kognitive Verhaltenstherapie) zugeführt.

Lithium versus antidepressants in the long-term treatment of unipolar affective disorder

BACKGROUND

The main rationale for the use of lithium in the long-term treatment of unipolar affective disorder is its efficacy in treating bipolar affective disorder and resistant depression. However, there is considerable uncertainty about which pharmacological intervention is most effective in the long-term treatment of recurrent unipolar affective disorder.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of lithium versus antidepressants for the long-term treatment of recurrent affective disorder.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Collaboration Depression, Anxiety and Neurosis Controlled Trials Registers (CCDANCTR-Studies and CCDANCTR-References) on 2/9/2005. Reference lists of relevant papers and major textbooks of affective disorder were checked. Experts in the field and pharmaceutical companies were contacted regarding unpublished material.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing lithium against antidepressant medication for the long-term treatment of patients with a diagnosis of affective disorder.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. We collected adverse effects information from the trials.

MAIN RESULTS

Eight trials involving 475 people were included. Two of the studies included a mixed group of participants with either bipolar or unipolar disorder. Relapse was defined as admission to hospital and when all kinds of relapses were considered (both depressive and manic), there was a statistically significant difference in favour of lithium (relative risk (RR) fixed effect 0.34, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.82). The results did not exclude the point of no effect, when the random-effects model was used (RR random effects 0.40, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.18). There were no other statistically significant differences between lithium and antidepressants according to all other outcomes considered. Manic or depressive relapse was defined as prescription of non-study medication for mood disorder, manic or depressive relapse (as defined by the study authors), quality of life, social functioning, occupational functioning, overall drop-out rate, drop-out rate due to side-effects, troublesome side-effects, mortality due to all causes and specifically suicides.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was adequate efficacy evidence for lithium or antidepressants preventing relapse in unipolar affective disorder, however their relative efficacy was unknown. When considering lithium or antidepressant long-term therapy, patients and clinicians should take into account the patient's clinical history, the side-effects and the individual's likely adherence to the recommended treatment regime. Large-scale, long-term randomised trials in unselected groups of subjects with unipolar affective disorder are needed.

Decreased risk of suicides and attempts during long-term lithium treatment: a meta-analytic review

OBJECTIVES

To update and extend comparisons of rates of suicides and suicide attempts among patients with major affective disorders with versus without long-term lithium treatment.

METHODS

Broad searching yielded 45 studies providing rates of suicidal acts during lithium treatment, including 34 also providing rates without lithium treatment. We scored study quality, tested between-study variance, and examined suicidal rates on versus off lithium by meta-analytic methods to determine risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

In 31 studies suitable for meta-analysis, involving a total of 85,229 person-years of risk-exposure, the overall risk of suicides and attempts was five times less among lithium-treated subjects than among those not treated with lithium (RR = 4.91, 95% CI 3.82-6.31, p < 0.0001). Similar effects were found with other meta-analytic methods, as well as for completed versus attempted suicide, and for bipolar versus major mood disorder patients. Studies with higher quality ratings, including randomized, controlled trials, involved shorter exposures with somewhat lesser lithium superiority. Omitting one very large study or those involving lithium-discontinuation had little effect on the results. The incidence-ratio of attempts-to-suicides increased 2.5 times with lithium-treatment, indicating reduced lethality of suicidal acts. There was no indication of bias toward reporting positive findings, nor were outcomes significantly influenced by publication-year or study size.

CONCLUSIONS

Risks of completed and attempted suicide were consistently lower, by approximately 80%, during treatment of bipolar and other major affective disorder patients with lithium for an average of 18 months. These benefits were sustained in randomized as well as open clinical trials.

Psychopharmacological treatment with lithium and antiepileptic drugs: suggested guidelines from the Danish Psychiatric Association and the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Association in Denmark

A subcommittee under the Danish Psychiatric Association and the Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Association in Denmark have recently developed national guidelines for the psychopharmacological treatment with lithium and antiepileptic drugs, and the present translation aims at contributing to the international discussion on the development of proper guidelines for the treatment of bipolar disorder. Among the antiepileptic drugs, the report deals with valproate, carbamazepine and lamotrigine and to a lesser extent with oxcarbazepine, gabapentin and topiramate. The various drugs will be reviewed, outlining the scientific evidence for mood-stabilizing properties and discussing major side effects, the most important interactions with other drugs and practical use. Special considerations during pregnancy and lactation, during treatment of children and adolescents and during treatment of the elderly will also be presented. Antidepressants and antipsychotics are beyond the scope of the report, but due to the mood-stabilizing properties of at least some of the atypical antipsychotics, these agents will be brought into some focus in connection with the overall treatment guidelines for the different phases of bipolar disorder given at the end of this report.

Endophenotypes in bipolar disorder

The search for genes in bipolar disorder has provided numerous genetic loci that have been linked to susceptibility to developing the disorder. However, because of the genetic heterogeneity inherent in bipolar disorder, additional strategies may need to be employed to fully dissect the genetic underpinnings. One such strategy involves reducing complex behaviors into their component parts (endophenotypes). Abnormal neurophysiological, biochemical, endocrinological, neuroanatomical, cognitive, and neuropsychological findings are characteristics that often accompany psychiatric illness. It is possible that some of these may eventually be useful in subdefining complex genetic disorders, allowing for improvements in diagnostic assessment, genetic linkage studies, and development of animal models. Findings in patients with bipolar disorder that may eventually be useful as endophenotypes include abnormal regulation of circadian rhythms (the sleep/wake cycle, hormonal rhythms, etc.), response to sleep deprivation, P300 event-related potentials, behavioral responses to psychostimulants and other medications, response to cholinergics, increase in white matter hyperintensities (WHIs), and biochemical observations in peripheral mononuclear cells. Targeting circadian rhythm abnormalities may be a particularly useful strategy because circadian cycles appear to be an inherent evolutionarily conserved function in all organisms and have been implicated in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder. Furthermore, lithium has been shown to regulate circadian cycles in diverse species, including humans, possibly through inhibition of glycogen synthase kinase 3-beta (GSK-3beta), a known target of lithium.

World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for Biological Treatment of Unipolar Depressive Disorders, Part 2: Maintenance treatment of major depressive disorder and treatment of chronic depressive disorders and subthreshold depressions

These practice guidelines for the biological treatment of unipolar depressive disorders were developed by an international Task Force of the World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP). The goal for developing these guidelines was to systematically review all available evidence pertaining to the treatment of the complete spectrum of unipolar depressive disorders, and to produce a series of practice recommendations that are clinically and scientifically meaningful based on the available evidence. These guidelines are intended for use by all physicians seeing and treating patients with these conditions. The data used for developing these guidelines have been extracted primarily from various national treatment guidelines and panels for depressive disorders, as well as from meta-analyses and reviews on the efficacy of antidepressant medications and other biological treatment interventions identified by a search of the MEDLINE database and Cochrane Library. The identified literature was evaluated with respect to the strength of evidence for its efficacy and was then categorized into four levels of evidence (A-D). The first part of these WFSBP guidelines on unipolar depressive disorders covered the acute and continuation treatment of major depressive disorder (Bauer et al 2002). This second part of the guidelines covers the management of the maintenance-phase treatment of major depressive disorder, as well as the treatment of chronic and subthreshold depressive disorders (dysthymic disorder, double depression, minor depressive disorder and recurrent brief depression). These guidelines are primarily concerned with the biological treatment (including antidepressants, lithium, other psychopharmacological and hormonal medications, and electroconvulsive therapy) of young adults and also, albeit to a lesser extent, children, adolescents and older adults.

Continuation and maintenance therapy in depression

This paper reviews longer term treatment for unipolar depression. Antidepressant continuation for prevention of early relapse has been routine for many years. Recent evidence supports a longer period of 9 months to 1 year after remission. Antidepressants are also effective in maintenance treatment for recurrent depression, and are indicated where there is clear risk of further episodes. Antidepressant withdrawal after continuation and maintenance should always be gradual, over a minimum of 3 months and longer after longer maintenance periods, to avoid withdrawal symptoms or rebound relapse. Trials of interpersonal therapy in the prevention of recurrence show some benefit, but effects are weaker than those of drug and additional benefit in combination is limited. There is better evidence for effects of cognitive therapy in preventing relapse and an emerging indication for its addition to antidepressants, particularly where residual symptoms are present.

Non-adherence with long-term prophylaxis: a 6-year naturalistic follow-up study of affectively ill patients

In a retrospective 6-year follow-up, we assessed the reasons for and the frequency and consequences of non-adherence in 76 affectively ill patients receiving lithium prophylaxis in two lithium clinics. Thirty-eight bipolar (50%), 21 unipolar (27.6%) and 17 schizoaffective patients (22.4%) diagnosed according to DSM-III-R, were investigated with a specialized follow-up documentation. Of the patients 53.9% discontinued prophylaxis at some time; 43.2% of the discontinuations occurred during the first 6 months. In contrast to other studies the main reason reported for non-adherence was resistance against long-term treatment. According to the Lithium Attitudes Questionnaire non-adherent patients showed significantly less acceptance of the prophylaxis in general, of the effectiveness of lithium and of the severity of their illness than adherent patients. In a multivariate analysis of various parameters, only the negative attitude to prophylaxis correlated significantly with non-adherence. Significant correlation was found between treatment outcome and duration of initial prophylaxis. During the 6-year follow-up only the adherent patients showed a significant reduction of the number and duration of admissions. Our findings confirmed non-adherence as a major problem in the effectiveness of lithium prophylaxis. The authors recommend prospective investigations of attitudes and the impact of psychoeducation on long-term adherence.

Differential response to lithium and carbamazepine in the prophylaxis of bipolar disorder

In a randomized, prospective, multicenter study with an observation period of 2.5 years, the differential prophylactic efficacy of lithium versus carbamazepine was compared in 171 patients fulfilling DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder. Serum drug levels were 0.6+/-0.1 mmol/L for lithium and 6.1+/-1.3 microg/mL for carbamazepine. Patients were subdivided into a classical subgroup (bipolar I patients without mood-incongruent delusions and without comorbidity, N = 67) and a nonclassical subgroup including all other patients (N = 104). Classical bipolar patients had a lower rehospitalization rate with lithium than with carbamazepine prophylaxis (p = 0.005). For the nonclassical group, a trend in favor of carbamazepine was found. In the lithium group, there was a positive association between hospitalization rate and number of nonclassical features (bipolar II/not otherwise specified, mood-incongruent delusions, comorbidity; p = 0.035). For carbamazepine, this association was negative (p = 0.033). Analyses including mixed states as an additional nonclassical feature confirmed the results. In conclusion, lithium seems to be superior to carbamazepine in treating classical bipolar cases. Patients with nonclassical features might profit more from prophylaxis with carbamazepine, which seems to have a broader spectrum of activity.

Lithium versus carbamazepine in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorders--a randomised study

In a randomised multicentre study, the prophylactic efficacy of lithium and carbamazepine was compared in 144 patients with bipolar disorder (74 vs. 70 patients; observation period: 2.5 years; lithium serum level: 0.63 +/- 0.12 mmol/l, carbamazepine dose: 621 +/- 186 mg/day). Hospitalisations, recurrences, need of psychotropic comedication and adverse effects prompting discontinuation were defined as treatment failures. Survival analyses regarding hospitalisations and recurrences showed no statistically significant differences between both drugs. Results were distinctly in favour of lithium, considering recurrences combined with comedication (P = 0.041) and/or adverse effects (P = 0.007). Whereas adverse effects prompting discontinuation were more frequent under carbamazepine (9 vs. 4, ns), lithium patients reported more often slight/moderate side effects (61% vs. 21% after 2.5 years; P = 0.0006). In completers, recurrences occurred in 28% (lithium) vs. 47% (carbamazepine) of the patients (P = 0.06). Lithium seems to be superior to carbamazepine in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder, in particular when applying broader outcome criteria including psychotropic comedication and severe side effects.

Personality differences between patients with major depression and bipolar disorder--the impact of minor symptoms on self-ratings of personality

The study explores whether minor symptoms of patients in recovery from a mood disorder have an impact on self-ratings of personality with special consideration of potential differences between diagnostic groups. 90 recovered DSM-III-R major unipolar depressives and 167 recovered bipolars were compared with respect to scale values of the Munich Personality Test (MPT). Major depressives showed significantly higher scores on the MPT scales Rigidity and Orientation towards Social Norms, and lower scores on Extraversion than the bipolar patients. Using a LISREL-model, psychopathology was found to have a significant impact on Neuroticism and Extraversion, but not on Rigidity and on Orientation towards Social Norms. Controlling for symptomatology, the differences in the MPT scale values of the two diagnostic groups remained significant and can hardly be sufficiently explained by residual symptomatology.

Lithium vs carbamazepine in the maintenance treatment of schizoaffective disorder: a randomised study

In a randomised multicentre study, the prophylactic efficacy of lithium and carbamazepine was compared in schizoaffective disorder. A total of 90 ICD-9 schizoaffective patients were included in the maintenance phase (2.5 years). They were also diagnosed according to RDC and DSM-III-R and classified into subgroups. Mean serum levels were 0.58 +/- 0.12 mmol/l for lithium and 6.4 +/- 1.5 micrograms/ml for carbamazepine (mean dose 643 +/- 179 mg/d). Outcome criteria were hospitalisation, recurrence, concomitant psychotropic medication and adverse effects leading to discontinuation. There were more non-completers under carbamazepine than under lithium (p = 0.02). Survival analyses demonstrated no significant differences between lithium and carbamazepine in treatment outcome. Patient's ratings of side effects (p = 0.003) and treatment satisfaction (p = 0.02) favoured carbamazepine. Following the RDC criteria, patients of the schizodepressive and non-classifiable type did better under carbamazepine (p = 0.055 for recurrence), whereas in the schizomanic patients equipotency of both drugs was found. Applying DSM-III-R, carbamazepine demonstrated a superiority in the patient group with more schizophrenia-like or depressive disorders (p = 0.040 for recurrence), but not in patients fulfilling the DSM-III-R criteria of bipolar disorder. Lithium and carbamazepine seem to be equipotent alternatives in the maintenance treatment of broadly defined schizoaffective disorders. However, in subgroups with depressive or schizophrenia-like features and regarding its long-term tolerability carbamazepine seems to be superior.