Co-occurring manic symptomatology as a dimension which may help explaining heterogeneity of depression

Cluster analysis with MOODS-SR illustrates a potential bipolar disorder risk phenotype in young adults with remitted major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVES

Delays in the diagnosis and detection of bipolar disorder can lead to adverse consequences, including improper treatment and increased suicide risk. The Mood Spectrum Self-Report Measure (MOODS-SR) was designed to capture the full spectrum of lifetime mood symptomology with factor scores for depression and mania symptom constellations. The utility of the MOODS-SR as a tool to investigate homogeneous subgroups was examined, with particular focus on a possible bipolar risk subgroup. Moreover, potential patterns of differences in MOODS-SR subtypes were probed using cognitive vulnerabilities, neuropsychological functioning, and ventral striatum connectivity.

METHODS

K-mean cluster analysis based on factor scores of MOODS-SR was used to determine homogeneous subgroupings within a healthy and remitted depressed young adult sample (N = 86). Between-group comparisons (based on cluster subgroupings) were conducted on measures of cognitive vulnerabilities, neuropsychological functioning, and ventral striatum rs-fMRI connectivity.

RESULTS

Three groups of participants were identified: one with minimal symptomology, one with moderate primarily depressive symptomology, and one with more severe manic and depressive symptomology. Differences in impulsivity, neuroticism, conscientiousness, facial perception accuracy, and rs-fMRI connectivity exist between moderate and severe groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Within a sample of people with and without depression histories, a severe subgroup was identified with potentially increased risk of developing bipolar disorder through use of the MOODS-SR. This small subgroup had higher levels of lifetime depression and mania symptoms. Additionally, differences in traits, affective processing, and connectivity exist between those with a more prototypic unipolar subgrouping and those with potential risk for developing bipolar disorder.

Predictors of the onset of manic symptoms and a (hypo)manic episode in patients with major depressive disorder

Objective

One third of patients with a major depressive episode also experience manic symptoms or, even, a (hypo)manic episode. Retrospective studies on the temporal sequencing of symptomatology suggest that the majority of these patients report depressive symptoms before the onset of manic symptoms. However, prospective studies are scarce and this study will, therefore, prospectively examine the onset of either manic symptoms or a (hypo)manic episode in patients with a major depressive disorder. In addition, we will consider the impact of a large set of potential risk factors on both outcomes.

Methodology

Four-year follow-up data were used to determine the onset of manic symptoms as well as a CIDI-based (hypo)manic episode in a large sample (n = 889, age: 18–65 years) of outpatients with a major depressive disorder and without manic symptoms at baseline. Baseline vulnerability (i.e., sociodemographics, family history of depression, childhood trauma, life-events) and clinical (i.e., isolated manic symptoms, depression characteristics, and psychiatric comorbidity) factors were considered as potential risk factors.

Results

In our sample of depressed patients, 15.9% developed manic symptoms and an additional 4.7% developed a (hypo)manic episode during four years. Baseline isolated manic symptoms and comorbid alcohol dependence predicted both the onset of manic symptoms and a (hypo)manic episode. Low education only predicted the onset of manic symptoms, whereas male gender, childhood trauma and severity of depressive symptoms showed strong associations with, especially, the onset of (hypo)manic episodes.

Conclusions

A substantial proportion (20.6%) of patients with a major depressive disorder later developed manic symptoms or a (hypo)manic episode. Interestingly, some identified risk factors differed for the two outcomes, which may indicate that pathways leading to the onset of manic symptoms or a (hypo)manic episode might be different. Our findings indirectly support a clinical staging model.

Treatment adherence towards prescribed medications in bipolar-II acute depressed patients: relationship with cyclothymic temperament and "therapeutic sensation seeking" in response towards subjective intolerance to pain

BACKGROUND

Treatment adherence (TA) is crucial during almost any phase of bipolar disorder (BD), including type-II (BD-II) acute depression. While a number of issues have been traditionally accounted on the matter, additional factors should be likewise involved, including affective temperaments and some clinically suggestive psychopathological traits whose systematic assessment represents the aim of this study.

METHODS

Two hundred and twenty BD-II acute depressed outpatients were consecutively evaluated using the Structured Clinical Interviews for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition Axis-I and II Disorders, Hamilton scales for Depression and Anxiety, Temperament Evaluation of the Memphis Pisa Paris San Diego-Auto-questionnaire-110-item, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Zuckerman's Sensation-Seeking Scale-Form-V (SSS-V), Barratt's Impulsivity Scale-11-item, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory modules, Severity module of the Clinical Global Impression Scale for BD, Morisky 8-Item Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) and the Clinician Rating Scale (CRS). Patients were divided into non-adherent vs. treatment-adherent cases depending on MMAS-8+CRS scores.

RESULTS

In the TA(-) group, higher VAS and cyclothymic temperament scores were highly correlated (r=.699; p≤.001). Those latter scores, along with SSS-V scores and the occurrence of lifetime addiction to painkiller and/or homeopathic medications available over the counter defined a "therapeutic sensation seeking" pattern allowing to correctly classify as much as 93.9% [Exp(B)=3.490; p≤.001] of TA(-) cases (49/220).

LIMITS

Lack of objective TA measures and systematic pharmacological record; recall bias on some diagnoses; and relatively small sample size.

CONCLUSIONS

Stating the burden of TA in BD, additional studies on this regard are aimed, ideally contributing to enhance the management of BD itself.

A twin study of depression and nicotine dependence: shared liability or causal relationship?

BACKGROUND

The nature of the relationship between major depression (MD) and phenotypes related to smoking behavior, including nicotine dependence (ND), is complicated. We present results from analyses comparing models wherein MD and ND are influenced by a shared latent factor to one in which causal pathways between phenotypes are examined.

METHOD

Data were collected for 2906 adult male twins from a population-based sample. Structural equation modeling was used to derive path estimates for shared liability and causal models. MD was assessed according to DSM-III-R diagnostic criteria; ND was assessed using the Fagerstrom Test for Nicotine Dependence (FTND).

RESULTS

The best fitting shared liability model included genetic, but not environmental, influences shared between MD and FTND; a small proportion of these shared influences were also common to smoking initiation. The best fitting causal model included a unidirectional causal path from FTND to MD, with no direct genetic correlation between MD and smoking initiation. Model fit statistics indicated that these models provided nearly identical fits to the data, with the causal model providing a slightly superior AIC value.

CONCLUSIONS

The phenotypic association between MD and FTND is likely due to both a causal relationship, wherein increasing levels of nicotine dependence increase one's risk for depression, and to a shared genetic liability between the two.

LIMITATIONS

This sample consists of Caucasian males born in Virginia, and findings might not be generalizable to others. Statistical power was less than ideal.