An update on the treatment of mixed bipolar states: what is new in 2013?

Homocysteine, chronotype and clinical course in bipolar disorder patients

Purpose: Higher homocysteine (HHcy) levels have been detected in bipolar disorder (BD) patients, and BD patients show circadian rhythm disorders even during remission. Here, we determined the homocysteine (Hcy) levels and chronotype of patients with BD during remission and investigated whether this was related to the clinical course of the disease. Materials and methods: In total, 80 BD outpatients were included. Clinical evaluation was conducted using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) and the Morningness-Eveningness Questionnaire (MEQ). Hcy, folic acid, vitamin B12 levels and protein consumption the day before clinical evaluation were measured.Results and conclusions: HHcy was found in 11 patients (8.8%), most of whom were males (n = 8, 72.7%). During the course of BD, patients with HHcy had significantly more mixed episodes than patients without HHcy (p = .007, z = -2696). In addition, patients with HHcy had significantly lower MEQ scores than patients without HHcy (p = .04, t = 2018). There was no significant difference in chronotype between patients with and without HHcy. The HHcy group had significantly lower levels of vitamin B12 (p = .003, t = 2870). There were no statistically significant differences in daily protein intake and folic acid levels between HHcy and non-HHcy groups. Our study showed a significant relationship between the number of mixed episodes and HHcy. In terms of potential confounds, patients who abused alcohol were excluded, but alcohol consumption was not evaluated. This result should be considered in BD and should be evaluated in larger samples of BD patients.

Does the efficacy of asenapine in bipolar disorder increase in the presence of comorbidity with a substance use disorder? A naturalistic study

BACKGROUND

Asenapine is a second-generation antipsychotic approved in Europe for treating moderate-to-severe manic episodes in adults affected by type I bipolar disorder (BD-I). We aimed to compare its efficacy in psychiatric inpatients with BD-I, with or without substance use disorder (SUD).

METHODS

We administered flexible asenapine doses ranging from 5-20 mg/day to 119 voluntarily hospitalized patients with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) BD-I diagnosis, with or without SUD. Patients were assessed with clinician-rated questionnaires [i.e. Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS), Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HARS), and Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF)]. Assessments were carried out at baseline (T0, prior to treatment), and 3 (T1), 7 (T2), 15 (T3), and 30 days (T4) after starting treatment for all clinical scales and at T0 and T4 for the GAF.

RESULTS

Patients improved on all scales (p < 0.001) across all timepoints, as shown both by paired-sample comparisons and by applying a repeated-measures, generalized linear model (GLM). Patients without comorbid SUD showed greater reductions in BPRS scores at T2 and T3, greater reduction in YMRS scores at T3, and lower HARS scores at all timepoints. HDRS scores did not differ between the two groups at any timepoint. However, the reduction in HARS scores in the comorbid group was stronger than in the BD-I only group, albeit not significantly. Side effects were few and mild-to-moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

The open-label design and the relatively short observation period may expose to both type I and type II statistical errors (false positive and false negatives). Asenapine showed effectiveness and safety in hospitalized BD-I patients. Its effect was stronger in patients without comorbid SUD.

Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders

OBJECTIVES

To provide guidance for the management of mood disorders, based on scientific evidence supplemented by expert clinical consensus and formulate recommendations to maximise clinical salience and utility.

METHODS

Articles and information sourced from search engines including PubMed and EMBASE, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Google Scholar were supplemented by literature known to the mood disorders committee (MDC) (e.g., books, book chapters and government reports) and from published depression and bipolar disorder guidelines. Information was reviewed and discussed by members of the MDC and findings were then formulated into consensus-based recommendations and clinical guidance. The guidelines were subjected to rigorous successive consultation and external review involving: expert and clinical advisors, the public, key stakeholders, professional bodies and specialist groups with interest in mood disorders.

RESULTS

The Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Psychiatrists clinical practice guidelines for mood disorders (Mood Disorders CPG) provide up-to-date guidance and advice regarding the management of mood disorders that is informed by evidence and clinical experience. The Mood Disorders CPG is intended for clinical use by psychiatrists, psychologists, physicians and others with an interest in mental health care.

CONCLUSIONS

The Mood Disorder CPG is the first Clinical Practice Guideline to address both depressive and bipolar disorders. It provides up-to-date recommendations and guidance within an evidence-based framework, supplemented by expert clinical consensus.

MOOD DISORDERS COMMITTEE

Professor Gin Malhi (Chair), Professor Darryl Bassett, Professor Philip Boyce, Professor Richard Bryant, Professor Paul Fitzgerald, Dr Kristina Fritz, Professor Malcolm Hopwood, Dr Bill Lyndon, Professor Roger Mulder, Professor Greg Murray, Professor Richard Porter and Associate Professor Ajeet Singh.

INTERNATIONAL EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Carlo Altamura, Dr Francesco Colom, Professor Mark George, Professor Guy Goodwin, Professor Roger McIntyre, Dr Roger Ng, Professor John O'Brien, Professor Harold Sackeim, Professor Jan Scott, Dr Nobuhiro Sugiyama, Professor Eduard Vieta, Professor Lakshmi Yatham.

AUSTRALIAN AND NEW ZEALAND EXPERT ADVISORS

Professor Marie-Paule Austin, Professor Michael Berk, Dr Yulisha Byrow, Professor Helen Christensen, Dr Nick De Felice, A/Professor Seetal Dodd, A/Professor Megan Galbally, Dr Josh Geffen, Professor Philip Hazell, A/Professor David Horgan, A/Professor Felice Jacka, Professor Gordon Johnson, Professor Anthony Jorm, Dr Jon-Paul Khoo, Professor Jayashri Kulkarni, Dr Cameron Lacey, Dr Noeline Latt, Professor Florence Levy, A/Professor Andrew Lewis, Professor Colleen Loo, Dr Thomas Mayze, Dr Linton Meagher, Professor Philip Mitchell, Professor Daniel O'Connor, Dr Nick O'Connor, Dr Tim Outhred, Dr Mark Rowe, Dr Narelle Shadbolt, Dr Martien Snellen, Professor John Tiller, Dr Bill Watkins, Dr Raymond Wu.

Making sense of DSM-5 mania with depressive features

OBJECTIVE

The assessment of the depressive component during mania has become critical for the accurate diagnosis of mixed states, which were defined very narrowly in the past classification systems before Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.). The aim of this study was to compare socio-demographic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics, as well as clinical and functional outcomes, between manic patients with and without mixed features to validate the relevance of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (5th ed.) mixed specifier.

METHODS

This is a subanalysis of a multicentre naturalistic study MANía Aguda y COnsumo de Recursos (acute mania and health resource consumption [MANACOR]) on the burden of mania in bipolar patients from four hospitals in Catalonia (Spain). The sample consisted of 169 adult patients presenting a manic episode and systematically assessed during a 6-month period.

RESULTS

A total of 27% (n = 46/169) of manic patients showed mixed features. Total number of episodes (p = 0.027), particularly depressive and mixed, was greater in manic patients with mixed features, as well as depressive onset (p = 0.018), suicide ideation (p = 0.036), rapid cycling (p = 0.035) and personality disorders (p = 0.071). In contrast, a higher percentage of pure manic subjects were inpatients (p = 0.035), started the illness with mania (p = 0.018) and showed family history of bipolar disorder (p = 0.037), congruent psychotic symptoms (p = 0.001) and cannabis use (p = 0.006). At baseline, pure manic patients received more risperidone (p = 0.028), while mixed patients received more valproate (p = 0.049) and antidepressants (p = 0.005). No differences were found in syndromic recovery at the end of the study. However, depressive change was higher in the mixed group (p = 0.010), while manic change was higher in the pure manic group (p = 0.029). At the end of follow-up, the group with mixed features showed a significant trend towards higher psychosocial dysfunction.

CONCLUSION

A total of 27% of manic patients showed mixed features. Groups differed regarding clinical characteristics, course of illness, psychosocial functioning, prescribed treatment and symptom progress. Depressive symptoms in mania should be routinely assessed and considered to guide treatment.

Investigating the mechanism(s) underlying switching between states in bipolar disorder

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a unique disorder that transcends domains of function since the same patient can exhibit depression or mania, states with polar opposite mood symptoms. During depression, people feel helplessness, reduced energy, and risk aversion, while with mania behaviors include grandiosity, increased energy, less sleep, and risk preference. The neural mechanism(s) underlying each state are gaining clarity, with catecholaminergic disruption seen during mania, and cholinergic dysfunction during depression. The fact that the same patient cycles/switches between these states is the defining characteristic of BD however. Of greater importance therefore, is the mechanism(s) underlying cycling from one state - and its associated neural changes - to another, considered the 'holy grail' of BD research. Herein, we review studies investigating triggers that induce switching to these states. By identifying such triggers, researchers can study neural mechanisms underlying each state and importantly how such mechanistic changes can occur in the same subject. Current animal models of this switch are also discussed, from submissive- and dominant-behaviors to kindling effects. Focus however, is placed on how seasonal changes can induce manic and depressive states in BD sufferers. Importantly, changing photoperiod lengths can induce local switches in neurotransmitter expression in normal animals, from increased catecholaminergic expression during periods of high activity, to increased somatostatin and corticotrophin releasing factor during periods of low activity. Identifying susceptibilities to this switch would enable the development of targeted animal models. From animal models, targeted treatments could be developed and tested that would minimize the likelihood of switching.

Cost-effectiveness of asenapine in the treatment of patients with bipolar I disorder with mixed episodes in an Italian context

INTRODUCTION

Bipolar disorder is a chronic disease characterized by periods of mania or hypomania, depression, or a combination of both (mixed state). Because bipolar disorder is one of the leading causes of disability, it represents an important economic burden on society. Asenapine (ASE) is a new second-generation antipsychotic developed and approved for the treatment of manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar disorder. The objective of the present study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of ASE compared to olanzapine (OLA) in the treatment of patients experiencing mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder in the context of the Italian National Health Service (NHS).

METHODS

A pharmacoeconomic model was developed to simulate the management of Italian bipolar I patients with mixed episodes over a 5-year time horizon by combining clinical parameters with resource utilization. An expert panel of Italian psychiatrists and health economists was responsible for adapting a UK model to the Italian context. The primary outcome measure of the economic evaluation was the incremental cost effectiveness ratio, where effectiveness is measured in terms of quality adjusted life-years gained. Scenario analyses, sensitivity analyses, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to test the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

This pharmacoeconomic model showed that ASE resulted to be dominant over OLA; in fact, ASE was associated with lower direct costs (derived largely by the savings from hospitalizations avoided) and also generated a better quality of life. Results were robust to changes in key parameters; both scenario analyses and sensitivity analyses demonstrated model reliability.

CONCLUSIONS

Results from this study suggest that the management of bipolar I patients with mixed episodes using ASE as alternative to OLA can lead to cost saving for the Italian NHS and improve patients quality of life.