Diagnosis of bipolar disorder in primary and secondary care: what have we learned over a 10-year period?

Treating Bipolar Disorder in Primary Care: Diagnosis, Pharmacology, and Management

Bipolar disorder is a chronic mental illness associated with early mortality, elevated risk of comorbid cardiovascular disease, enormous burden of disability, and large societal costs. Patients often seek treatment for symptoms of bipolar disorder in the primary care setting but are frequently misdiagnosed. This article provides primary care providers with an evidence-based approach to the screening, diagnosis, and pharmacological management of bipolar disorder. Guidance is also provided for helping patients connect with higher levels of specialty psychiatric care when clinically indicated.

Similarly in depression, nuances of gut microbiota: Evidences from a shotgun metagenomics sequencing study on major depressive disorder versus bipolar disorder with current major depressive episode patients

BACKGROUND

To probe the differences of gut microbiota among major depressive disorder (MDD), bipolar disorder with current major depressive episode (BPD) and health participants.

METHODS

Thirty one MDD patients, thirty BPD patients, and thirty healthy controls (HCs) were recruited. All the faecal samples were analyzed by shotgun metagenomics sequencing. Except for routine analyses of alpha diversity, we specially designed a new indicator, the G_m coefficient, to evaluate the inequality of relative abundances of microbiota for each participant.

RESULTS

The G_m coefficients are significant decreased in both MDD and BPD groups. The relative abundances of increased phyla Firmicutes and Actinobacteria and decreased Bacteroidetes were significantly in the MDD and BPD groups. At genus level, four of top five enriched genera (Bacteroides, Clostridium, Bifidobacterium, Oscillibacter and Streptococcus) were found increased significantly in the MDD and BPD groups compared with HCs. The genera Escherichia and Klebsiella showed significant changes in abundances only between the BPD and HC groups. At the species level, compared with BPD patients, MDD patients had a higher abundance of Prevotellaceae including Prevotella denticola F0289, Prevotella intermedia 17, Prevotella ruminicola, and Prevotella intermedia. Furthermore, the abundance of Fusobacteriaceae, Escherichia blattae DSM 4481 and Klebsiella oxytoca were significantly increased, whereas the Bifidobacterium longum subsp. infantis ATCC 15697 = JCM 1222 was significantly reduced in BPD group compared with MDD group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggested that gut microbiota may be involved in the pathogenesis of both MDD and BPD patients, and the nuances of bacteria may have the potentiality of being the biomarkers of MDD and BPD.

Factors associated with false positives in MDQ screening for bipolar disorder: Insight into the construct validity of the scale

BACKGROUND

Identifying bipolar patients in the first phases of the illness is essential to establish adequate treatment. The goal of this study was to examine the discriminant ability of the Mood Disorders Questionnaire (MDQ) in recognizing bipolar patients referred to a tertiary care structure.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2012, we assessed 843 individuals referred to the Mood Disorders Program by family physicians in the community. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR (SCID) was used to assess diagnoses. A nurse collected the information about lifetime symptoms of (hypo)mania in 759 individuals using the MDQ. Univariate chi-square test and logistic regression were used for the statistical analysis.

RESULTS

Overall, 86% of the sample had a current anxiety or depressive disorder. When compared to the diagnoses formulated through the SCID, the sensitivity of the MDQ was 75.0%, the specificity was 74%, the positive predictive value was 55%, and the negative predictive value was 88%. Among non-bipolar patients, current post-traumatic stress disorder, borderline personality disorder, current or early remission substance use disorder, and the history of childhood abuse were independently associated with false positive screening using the MDQ.

LIMITATIONS

Individuals with current substance use disorders were under-represented, whether or not the patients were aware of their diagnosis of bipolar disorder was not recorded, and the history of childhood abuse was collected based on an open interview.

CONCLUSIONS

The self-rated measure of the symptoms listed by the MDQ seems to measure a dimension shared by both bipolar disorder and other conditions characterized by affective instability and impulsivity.

C-reactive protein: A differential biomarker for major depressive disorder and bipolar II disorder

Objectives We aimed to examine whether the C-reactive protein (CRP) level could be used to differentiate between major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar II disorder (BD II). Methods Ninety-six healthy controls, 88 BD II and 72 MDD drug-naïve patients in their major depressive episodes were enrolled. The fasting plasma level of high-sensitivity CRP was assessed at baseline and after treatment. Results The BD II patients presented significantly higher 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) scores and CRP levels at baseline when adjustment for age, gender, and body mass index (P <  0.001 and P <  0.001, respectively). After treatment the CRP levels remained significantly different (P <  0.001), although the HDRS score was not significantly different between the BD II and MDD patients. A receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that a baseline CRP level of 621.6 ng/mL could discriminate between BD II and MDD, with an area under the curve of 0.816 and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.699 and 0.882, respectively. Furthermore, the baseline CRP level greater than 621.6 ng/ml had 28.2 higher odds of a diagnosis of BD II (P <  0.001, 95% confidence interval: 10.96-72.35). Conclusions The level of CRP plays a role of biomarker to differentiate between MDD and BD II depression in both their depressed and euthymic state.

Factor analysis of temperament and personality traits in bipolar patients: Correlates with comorbidity and disorder severity

BACKGROUND

Temperament and personality traits have been suggested as endophenotypes for bipolar disorder based on several lines of evidence, including heritability. Previous work suggested an anxious-reactive factor identified across temperament and personality inventories that produced significant group discrimination and could potentially be useful in genetic analyses. We have attempted to further characterize this factor structure in a sample of bipolar patients.

METHODS

A sample of 1195 subjects with bipolar I disorder was evaluated, all with complete data available. Dimension reduction across two inventories identified 18 factors explaining 39% of the variance.

RESULTS

The two largest factors reflected affective instability and general anxiety/worry, respectively. Subsequent analyses of the clinical features associated with bipolar disorder revealed specificity for the factors in a predictable pattern. Cluster analysis of the factors identified a subgroup defined by a strong lack of general anxiety and low affective instability represented by the first two factors. The remaining subjects could be distinguished into two clusters by the presence of either more positive characteristics, including persistence/drive, spirituality, expressivity, and humor, or more negative characteristics of depression and anxiety.

LIMITATIONS

These analyses involved bipolar I subjects only and must be extended to other bipolar spectrum diagnoses, unaffected relatives, and individuals at risk.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that temperament and personality measures access latent traits associated with important clinical features of bipolar disorder. By translating clinical variables into quantitative traits, we may identify subgroups of bipolar patients with distinct clinical profiles, thereby facilitating both individual treatment strategies and genetic analyses.

How common is bipolar disorder in general primary care attendees? A systematic review and meta-analysis investigating prevalence determined according to structured clinical assessments

OBJECTIVE

There are mounting calls for bipolar disorder to be managed in primary care, yet the exact prevalence remains unclear. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate the prevalence of bipolar disorder in general primary care attendees without other comorbid psychiatric diagnosis.

METHOD

We systematically searched major electronic databases from inception till 03/2015. Articles were included that reported the prevalence of bipolar disorder determined in line with structured clinical assessment in primary care settings. Two independent authors conducted searches, completed methodological appraisal and extracted data. A random effects meta-analysis and meta-regression were performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen studies were included accounting for 425,691 participants (mean age = 41.1 years [standard deviation = 7.2 years] 33.3% males). Overall, the global prevalence of bipolar disorder was 1.9% (95% confidence interval = [0.6, 5.4]). The prevalence of bipolar disorder in studies recording a current diagnosis was 3.7% (95% confidence interval = [1.9, 6.0]) and 0.7% (95% confidence interval = [0.2, 1.5]) in studies considering a 12-month period. A diagnosis of bipolar disorder appeared higher in North America (3.7%, 95% confidence interval = [0.9, 8.1]) compared to Europe (0.8%, 95% confidence interval = [0.3, 1.5]). Meta-regression suggests that a more recent publication date (co-efficient = 0.089, 95% confidence interval = [0.0173, 0.1654], z = 2.19, p = 0.01, R(2) = 0.21) and younger age of participants (co-efficient -0.0851, 95% confidence interval = [-0.1696, 0.005], z = -1.97, p = 0.04, R(2) = 0.24) moderated a higher prevalence of bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSION

The global prevalence of bipolar disorder in primary care is 1.9%, with potentially higher prevalence rates in North America compared to Europe. A more recent study publication date is a significant predictor of higher prevalence of bipolar disorder. Potential reasons/drivers of this are considered within the text.

The development of lurasidone for bipolar depression

Bipolar disorder is a chronic, recurrent illness that ranks among the top 10 causes of disability in the developed world. As the illness progresses, major depressive episodes increasingly predominate. However, few treatment options are available that have demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of bipolar depression, either as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in combination with mood stabilizers. Lurasidone is an atypical antipsychotic drug that was initially developed for the treatment of schizophrenia. Since no previous atypical antipsychotic development program had proceeded directly from work on schizophrenia to bipolar depression, the decision to focus on this indication represented an innovation in central nervous system drug development and was designed to address a clinically significant unmet need. The current review summarizes key results of a clinical development program undertaken to characterize the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in patients diagnosed with bipolar depression. Lurasidone is currently the only treatment for bipolar depression approved in the United States as both a monotherapy and an adjunctive therapy with lithium or valproate. The approval of lurasidone expands available treatment options for patients with bipolar depression and provides a therapy with an overall favorable risk-benefit profile.