Long-term safety and efficacy of armodafinil in bipolar depression: A 6-month open-label extension study

Efficacy and safety of established and off-label ADHD drug therapies for cognitive impairment or attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder symptoms in bipolar disorder: A systematic review by the ISBD Targeting Cognition Task Force

BACKGROUND

Abnormalities in dopamine and norepinephrine signaling are implicated in cognitive impairments in bipolar disorder (BD) and attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). This systematic review by the ISBD Targeting Cognition Task Force therefore aimed to investigate the possible benefits on cognition and/or ADHD symptoms and safety of established and off-label ADHD therapies in BD.

METHODS

We included studies of ADHD medications in BD patients, which involved cognitive and/or safety measures. We followed the procedures of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 statement. Searches were conducted on PubMed, Embase and PsycINFO from inception until June 2023. Two authors reviewed the studies independently using the Revised Cochrane Collaboration's Risk of Bias tool for Randomized trials.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were identified (N = 2136), investigating armodafinil (k = 4, N = 1581), methylphenidate (k = 4, N = 84), bupropion (k = 4, n = 249), clonidine (k = 1, n = 70), lisdexamphetamine (k = 1, n = 25), mixed amphetamine salts (k = 1, n = 30), or modafinil (k = 2, n = 97). Three studies investigated cognition, four ADHD symptoms, and 10 the safety. Three studies found treatment-related ADHD symptom reduction: two involved methylphenidate and one amphetamine salts. One study found a trend towards pro-cognitive effects of modafinil on some cognitive domains. No increased risk of (hypo)mania was observed. Five studies had low risk of bias, eleven a moderate risk, and one a serious risk of bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Methylphenidate or mixed amphetamine salts may improve ADHD symptoms in BD. However, there is limited evidence regarding the effectiveness on cognition. The medications produced no increased mania risk when used alongside mood stabilizers. Further robust studies are needed to assess cognition in BD patients receiving psychostimulant treatment alongside mood stabilizers.

Prescribed psychostimulants and other pro-cognitive medications in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis of recurrence of manic symptoms

OBJECTIVES

Clinicians are often hesitant to prescribe psychostimulants in bipolar disorder (BD) due to concerns of inducing (hypo)mania, despite limited published evidence on associations between prescribed psychostimulant use and recurrence of mood episodes in BD. The current systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated the emergence of (hypo)manic symptoms in patients with BD receiving prescribed psychostimulants or other pro-cognitive medications in euthymic or depressive states.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of MEDLINE, Embase, and PsychINFO from inception to April 5, 2023 and search of Clinicaltrials.gov and Clinicaltrialsregister.eu for unpublished data. References of included studies were hand-searched. Randomized trials and prospective longitudinal studies that evaluated psychostimulants and non-stimulant medications recommended for the treatment of ADHD by the Canadian ADHD practice guidelines were included. The review was reported in line with PRISMA guidelines and was preregistered on PROSPERO (CRD42022358588).

RESULTS

After screening 414 unique records, we included 27 studies, of which five reported data that was quantitatively synthesized (n = 1653). The use of psychostimulants in BD was not associated with increased scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale in patients who were in a euthymic or depressed state (SMD IV -0.17; 95% CI, -0.40 to 0.06) compared to placebo. There was a high degree of study-level heterogeneity (I2 = 80%). A qualitative synthesis of studies revealed a limited risk of medication-induced manic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

Our review provides preliminary evidence to suggest psychostimulants and non-stimulant ADHD medications have a limited risk of precipitating (hypo)mania symptoms. More extensive studies evaluating the safety and efficacy of these medications are warranted.

Pharmacokinetics of Novel Dopamine Transporter Inhibitor CE-123 and Modafinil with a Focus on Central Nervous System Distribution

S-CE-123, a novel dopamine transporter inhibitor, has emerged as a potential candidate for cognitive enhancement. The objective of this study was to compare the tissue distribution profiles, with a specific focus on central nervous system distribution and metabolism, of S-CE-123 and R-modafinil. To address this objective, a precise liquid chromatography-high resolution mass spectrometry method was developed and partially validated. Neuropharmacokinetic parameters were assessed using the Combinatory Mapping Approach. Our findings reveal distinct differences between the two compounds. Notably, S-CE-123 demonstrates a significantly superior extent of transport across the blood-brain barrier (BBB), with an unbound brain-to-plasma concentration ratio (Kp,uu,brain) of 0.5, compared to R-modafinil's Kp,uu,brain of 0.1. A similar pattern was observed for the transport across the blood-spinal cord barrier. Concerning the drug transport across cellular membranes, we observed that S-CE-123 primarily localizes in the brain interstitial space, whereas R-modafinil distributes more evenly across both sides of the plasma membrane of the brain's parenchymal cells (Kp,uu,cell). Furthermore, our study highlights the substantial differences in hepatic metabolic stability, with S-CE-123 having a 9.3-fold faster metabolism compared to R-modafinil. In summary, the combination of improved BBB transport and higher affinity of S-CE-123 to dopamine transporters in comparison to R-modafinil makes S-CE-123 a promising candidate for further testing for the treatment of cognitive decline.

Advances in the psychopharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder type I

INTRODUCTION

Research into the pharmacologic management of bipolar type I illness continues to progress.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized clinical trials performed with type I bipolar disorder in the years 2015 to August 2020 are reviewed. There are new indications for the use of cariprazine, for bipolar mania and depression, and a long-acting injectable formulation of aripiprazole has also been approved for relapse prevention in bipolar illness. Most of the randomized clinical trials are effectiveness studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Over the 20 years from 1997 through 2016, the use of lithium and other mood stabilizers has declined by 50%, while the use of both second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and antidepressants has increased considerably. Over the same time period (1990-2017), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) increased by 54.4%, from 6.02 million in 1990 to 9.29 million in 2017 which is greater than the 47.74% increase in incidence of the disease, suggesting that the changes in prescribing patterns have not been helpful for our patients. Furthermore, recent effectiveness studies continue to confirm the superiority of lithium and other mood stabilizers in the management of bipolar illness for both psychiatric and medical outcomes, reaffirming their role as foundational treatments in the management of type I bipolar disorder. Clinicians need to reassess their prescribing habits.

Pharmacological Treatment of Bipolar Depression: What are the Current and Emerging Options?

Depression accounts for the predominant burden associated with bipolar disorder. The identification and management of bipolar depression are challenging, since bipolar depression differs from unipolar depression, responding poorly to traditional antidepressants, which may also induce a switch to hypomania/mania, mixed states and/or cause rapid cycling. Current treatment options for bipolar depression are limited and guidelines vary greatly in their recommendations, reflecting gaps and inconsistencies in the current evidence base. Moreover, some treatment options, such as quetiapine and olanzapine-fluoxetine, although clearly efficacious, may be associated with adverse cardiometabolic side effects, which can be detrimental to the long-term physical health and well-being of patients, increasing the likelihood of treatment non-adherence and relapse. Evidence for some more recent therapeutic options, including lurasidone and cariprazine, suggests that patients' symptoms can be effectively managed without compromising their physical health. In addition, novel agents targeting alternative neurotransmitter pathways and inflammatory processes (such as ketamine and N-acetyl cysteine) are emerging as promising potential options for the treatment of bipolar depression in the future.

Neurophysiological and Neurochemical Effects of the Putative Cognitive Enhancer (S)-CE-123 on Mesocorticolimbic Dopamine System

Treatments for cognitive impairments associated with neuropsychiatric disorders, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder or narcolepsy, aim at modulating extracellular dopamine levels in the brain. CE-123 (5-((benzhydrylsulfinyl)methyl) thiazole) is a novel modafinil analog with improved specificity and efficacy for dopamine transporter inhibition that improves cognitive and motivational processes in experimental animals. We studied the neuropharmacological and behavioral effects of the S-enantiomer of CE-123 ((S)-CE-123) and R-modafinil in cognitive- and reward-related brain areas of adult male rats. In vivo single unit recordings in anesthetized animals showed that (S)-CE-123, but not R-modafinil, dose-dependently (1.25 to 10 mg/kg i.v.) reduced firing of pyramidal neurons in the infralimbic/prelimbic (IL/PrL) cortex. Neither compound the affected firing activity of ventral tegmental area dopamine cells. In freely moving animals, (S)-CE-123 (10 mg/kg i.p.) increased extracellular dopamine levels in the IL/PrL, with different patterns when compared to R-modafinil (10 mg/kg i.p.); in the nucleus accumbens shell, a low and transitory increase of dopamine was observed only after (S)-CE-123. Neither (S)-CE-123 nor R-modafinil initiated the emission of 50-kHz ultrasonic vocalizations, a behavioral marker of positive affect and drug-mediated reward. Our data support previous reports of the procognitive effects of (S)-CE-123, and show a minor impact on reward-related dopaminergic areas.

Modafinil Induced Psychosis in a Patient with Bipolar 1 Depression

Modafinil has been used as an adjunctive medication in the treatment of bipolar 1 depression with reported success. Case reports have been published demonstrating modafinil induced mania in bipolar patients and modafinil induced psychosis in schizophrenic patients. To our knowledge, we report the only case of modafinil induced psychosis in a patient with bipolar depression treated with both mood stabilizers and antipsychotics. In addition, it is the quickest onset to psychosis (2 days) at the lowest dosage of modafinil (100 mg/day) reported in the literature. Although favorable outcomes using modafinil for treatment of bipolar depression have been reported in literature, clinicians should remain cautious of the potential to rapidly induce psychosis with modafinil at low dosages in patients with bipolar depression despite being treated with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics.

The safety and tolerability of cariprazine in patients with manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder: A 16-week open-label study

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the safety/tolerability of longer-term open-label treatment with cariprazine in patients who had responded to cariprazine for acute bipolar mania.

METHODS

In this multinational, multicenter study, open-label, flexible-dose, cariprazine 3-12mg/d was administered for up to 16 weeks to patients (18-65 years) with bipolar mania. Safety evaluations included adverse events (AEs), laboratory values, vital signs, and extrapyramidal symptom (EPS) scales. Symptom change was evaluated by Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score change from baseline using the last observation carried forward approach.

RESULTS

Of the 402 patients taking cariprazine, 33% completed the trial; the most frequent reasons for discontinuation were withdrawal of consent (20%), AEs (16%), and protocol violation (14%). Most common AEs leading to discontinuation were akathisia (4.7%) and depression (1.5%). Mean treatment duration was 57.7 days; mean cariprazine dose was 6.2mg/d. The incidence of serious AEs was 7.5% (most common: mania [2.2%], depression [1.2%]); 83.3% had treatment-emergent AEs, including akathisia (32.6%), headache (16.7%), constipation (10.7%), and nausea (10.4%). Mean body weight increased <1kg; 9.3% had ≥7% weight gain; 5.7% had sedation; 3% had somnolence. Mean changes in laboratory values, vital signs, ECGs, and ophthalmology parameters were not clinically significant. Mean YMRS total score decreased by -15.2 at week 16.

LIMITATIONS

Uncontrolled, open-label design.

CONCLUSIONS

Open-label cariprazine 3-12 (mean 6.2) mg/d for up to 16 weeks was generally well tolerated, with low (<10%) rates of sedation and ≥7% weight gain. Although akathisia occurred in 33%, it yielded discontinuation in <5%.

Treatment of neurocognitive symptoms in unipolar depression: A systematic review and future perspectives

BACKGROUND

Cognitive symptoms in Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) are persistent and commonly entail neurocognitive impairment and a decline in quality of life. This systematic review gathers the current scientific evidence on therapeutic strategies for neuropsychological impairment in MDD.

METHOD

A systematic search on PubMed, PsycINFO and Clinicaltrials.gov was carried out on December 2016 according to PRISMA using Boolean terms to identify interventions for the treatment of cognitive dysfunction in MDD. Only English-written articles providing original data and focusing in adults with MDD were included with no time restrictions.

RESULTS

A total of 95 studies reporting data on 40 pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions were included. Interventions were grouped into the following categories: 1) Pharmacological Therapies (antidepressants, stimulants, compounds acting on NMDA receptors, compounds acting on the cholinergic system, compounds showing anti-inflammatory or antioxidant properties, other mechanisms of action), 2) Physical Therapies and 3) Psychological Therapies, 4) Exercise. There are some promising compounds showing a positive impact on cognitive symptoms including vortioxetine, lisdexamfetamine or erythropoietin.

LIMITATIONS

The studies included showed significant methodological differences in heterogeneous samples. The lack of a standardized neuropsychological battery makes comparisons between studies difficult.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence is not sufficient to widely recommend the use of procognitive treatments in MDD although promising results are coming to light.

Dopaminergic agents in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To systematically examine the effects of dopaminergic agents (modafinil, armodafinil, pramipexole, methylphenidate, and amphetamines) on bipolar depression outcomes.

METHODS

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of treatment with dopaminergic agents in bipolar depression. In a secondary analysis, findings from both randomized controlled trials and high-quality observational studies were pooled by means of meta-analytic procedures to explore dopaminergic treatment-related new mania.

RESULTS

Nine studies (1716 patients) were included in our meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Treatment with dopaminergic agents for bipolar depression was associated with an increase in both response (1671 individuals, RR 1.25, 95% CI 1.05 to 1.50) and remission rates (1671 individuals, RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.14, 1.71). There was no evidence of an increased risk of mood switch associated with this treatment (1646 individuals, RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.49, 1.89). Our secondary analysis (1231 individuals) yielded a cumulative incidence of mood switch of 3% (95% CI 1.0, 5.0) during a mean follow-up period of 7.5 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Preliminary findings suggest that dopaminergic agents may represent a useful alternative for the treatment of bipolar depression, with no evidence for a related increase in the risk of mood destabilization during short-term follow-up.