Evidence-based treatment strategies for rapid cycling bipolar disorder, a systematic review

Lithium and the risk of severe COVID-19 infection: A retrospective population-based register study

OBJECTIVES

Previous research has suggested antiviral properties for lithium, including potential effectiveness against COVID-19 in vitro. This study aimed to investigate the impact of lithium and other psychotropic drugs on the risks of mortality, hospitalization, and ICU admission due to COVID-19 among individuals with bipolar disorder. The primary objective was to assess whether lithium was beneficial in COVID-19-infection in a real-world population.

METHODS

Retrospective register study using data from multiple Swedish patient registers, including 39,063 individuals in Sweden with bipolar disorder and prescribed mood stabilizers. Outcomes included COVID-19-associated death, hospitalization, and ICU admission between 11 March 2020 and 10 March 2021. Multivariate logistic regression adjusted for age, sex, and somatic comorbidities was conducted.

RESULTS

Lithium were prescribed to 44.2 % of patients, either as mono- or combination therapy; other mood stabilizers were prescribed to 55.8 %. There were no significant associations between lithium and COVID-19-associated death, hospitalization, or ICU admission. Atypical antipsychotics were associated with increased odds ratios for COVID-19-associated death (OR 1.58 [95 % CI 1.01-2.47]), hospitalization (OR 1.80 [95 % CI 1.49-2.18]), and ICU admission (OR 2.25 [95 % CI 1.33-3.80]). Benzodiazepines were associated with a significant increase in COVID-19-associated death (OR 1.54 [95 % CI 1.01-2.35]) and hospitalization OR 1.26 [95 % CI 1.03-1.53]). In an ad hoc analysis, lithium monotherapy was, however, associated with reduced hospitalizations and ICU admissions.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings weaken the hypothesis that lithium reduces the risk of severe events associated with COVID-19 infection in bipolar disorder.

Sociodemographic, clinical and treatment characteristics of current rapid-cycling bipolar disorder: a multicenter Chinese study

BACKGROUND

Rapid cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD), characterized by four or more episodes per year, is a complex subtype of bipolar disorder (BD) with poorly understood characteristics.

METHOD

This multicenter, observational, longitudinal cohort study enrolled 520 BD patients across seven psychiatric institutions in China from January 2013 to January 2014. Participants were divided into RCBD and non-RCBD (NRCBD) groups based on the frequency of mood episodes in the preceding year. Data collection utilized a standardized form, supplemented by a medical record review, focusing on sociodemographic, clinical, and treatment characteristics. Statistical analysis involved independent samples t-tests, Kruskal-Wallis H tests, Chi-square or Fisher's exact tests, with Bonferroni correction applied to account for multiple comparisons, and multivariable logistic regression to identify characteristics associated with RCBD.

RESULTS

Among the BD cohort, 9.4% were identified as current RCBD. Compared to NRCBD, RCBD patients had a shorter duration from the first psychiatric consultation to the diagnosis of BD, a reduced duration of their longest period of euthymia, a lower proportion of lifetime hospitalization history due to BD, and less use of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) within the last 12 months. Additionally, they presented higher baseline scores on the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ) and the Brief 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report (QIDS-SR16). However, after applying the Bonferroni correction, these differences were not statistically significant. Multivariable logistic regression analysis identified three factors that were independently associated with RCBD: time from first psychiatric consultation to BD diagnosis (Odds Ratio [OR] = 0.512, P = 0.0416), lifetime hospitalization history due to BD (OR = 0.516, P = 0.0476), and ECT treatment within the past 12 months (OR = 0.293, P = 0.0472).

CONCLUSION

This study revealed that the duration from first psychiatric consultation to BD diagnosis, lifetime hospitalization history due to BD, and ECT treatment in the past year were associated with RCBD. Recognizing these factors could contribute to enhance the early identification and clinical outcomes of RCBD. Trial Registration Number Registry ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01770704. Date of Registration: First posted on January 18, 2013.

Current Status and Treatment of Rapid Cycling Bipolar Disorder

BACKGROUND

Rapid cycling (RC) at least 4 recurrent episodes per year in bipolar disorder (BD) has been recognized since the 1970s. We now comment on our recent review of the topic and extensive RC analysis in a large clinical cohort, emphasizing therapeutics research.

COMMENTS

Prevalence of RC-BD averages 36% for any year versus 22% in the preceding year. Rapid cycling is not a consistent feature over many years, although average long-term, annual recurrence rates are greater in RC-BD patients. Risk of RC may be somewhat greater among women and with older ages. It is also associated with cyclothymic temperament, prominent depression, and mood-switching with antidepressant treatment and is associated with increased suicidal risk. Treatment of individual episodes in RC-BD and effective long-term prevention remain inadequately studied, although antidepressant treatment can worsen RC. Some research supports treatment with aripiprazole, lamotrigine, and lithium, and interest in second-generation antipsychotics is emerging. All such options are used in various inadequately evaluated combinations.

CONCLUSIONS

Rapid cycling is prevalent among BD patients but seems to vary in risk over time without evidence of progressive worsening. Treatment of acute episodes in RC-BD patients and effective long-term preventive management require much more intensive investigation.

Role of adjunctive nonpharmacological strategies for treatment of rapid-cycling bipolar disorder

Rapid-cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD) is a phase of bipolar disorder defined by the presence of ≥ 4 mood episodes in a year. It is a common phenomenon characterized by greater severity, a predominance of depression, higher levels of disability, and poorer overall outcomes. It is resistant to treatment by conventional pharmacotherapy. The existing literature underlines the scarcity of evi-dence and the gaps in knowledge about the optimal treatment strategies for RCBD. However, most reviews have considered only pharmacological treatment options for RCBD. Given the treatment-refractory nature of RCBD, nonpharmacological interventions could augment medications but have not been adequately examined. This review carried out an updated and comprehensive search for evidence regarding the role of nonpharmacological therapies as adjuncts to medications in RCBD. We identified 83 reviews and meta-analyses concerning the treatment of RCBD. Additionally, we found 42 reports on adjunctive nonpharmacological treatments in RCBD. Most of the evidence favoured concomitant electroconvulsive therapy as an acute and maintenance treatment. There was pre-liminary evidence to suggest that chronotherapeutic treatments can provide better outcomes when combined with medications. The research on adjunctive psychotherapy was particularly scarce but suggested that psychoeducation, cognitive behavioural therapy, family interventions, and supportive psychotherapy may be helpful. The overall quality of evidence was poor and suffered from several methodological shortcomings. There is a need for more methodologically sound research in this area, although clinicians can use the existing evidence to select and individualize nonpharmacological treatment options for better management of RCBD. Patient summaries are included to highlight some of the issues concerning the implementation of adjunctive nonpharmacological treatments.

Prevalence and outcomes of rapid cycling bipolar disorder: Mixed method systematic meta-review

Rapid-cycling in bipolar disorder (RC-BD) is associated with greater illness morbidity and inferior treatment response but many aspects remain unclear, prompting this systematic review of its definitions, prevalence, and clinical characteristics. We searched multiple literature databases through April 2022 for systematic reviews or meta-analyses on RC-BD and extracted associated definitions, prevalence, risk-factors, and clinical outcomes. We assessed study quality (NIH Quality Assessment Tool) and levels of evidence (Oxford criteria). Of 146 identified reviews, 22 fulfilling selection criteria were included, yielding 30 studies involving 13,698 BD patients, of whom 3777 (27.6% [CI: 26.8-28.3]) were considered RC-BD, as defined in 14 reports by ≥4 recurrences/year within the past 12 months or in any year, without considering responsiveness to treatment. Random-effects meta-analytically pooled one-year prevalence was 22.3% [CI: 14.4-32.9] in 12 reports and lifetime prevalence was 35.5% [27.6-44.3] in 18 heterogenous reports. Meta-regression indicated greater lifetime prevalence of RC-BD among women than men (p=0.003). Association of RC-BD with suicide attempts, and unsatisfactory response to mood-stabilizers was supported by strong evidence (Level 1); associations with childhood maltreatment, mixed-features, female sex, and type-II BD had moderate evidence (Level 2). Other factors: genetic predisposition, metabolic disturbances or hypothyroidism, antidepressant exposure, predominant depressive polarity (Level 3), along with greater illness duration and immune-inflammatory dysfunction (Level 4) require further study. RC-BD was consistently recognized as having high prevalence (22.3%-35.5% of BD cases) and inferior treatment response. Identified associated factors can inform clinical practice. Long-term illness-course, metabolic factors, and optimal treatment require further investigation.

Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022: Comparisons with Other Treatment Guidelines

The objective of this study was to compare recommendations of the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022 (KMAP-BP 2022) with other recently published guidelines for treating bipolar disorder. We reviewed a total of six recently published global treatment guidelines and compared treatment recommendation of the KMAP-BP 2022 with those of other guidelines. For initial treatment of mania, there were no significant differences across treatment guidelines. All guidelines recommended mood stabilizer (MS) or atypical antipsychotic (AAP) monotherapy or a combination of an MS with an AAP as a first-line treatment strategy in a same degree for mania. However, the KMAP-BP 2022 recommended MS + AAP combination therapy for psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression as treatment of choice. Aripiprazole, quetiapine and olanzapine were the first-line AAPs for nearly all phases of bipolar disorder across guidelines. Some guideline suggested olanzapine is a second-line options during maintenance treatment, related to concern about long-term tolerability. Most guidelines advocated newer AAPs (asenapine, cariprazine, long-acting injectable risperidone, and aripiprazole once monthly) as first-line treatment options for all phases while lamotrigine was recommended for depressive and maintenance phases. Lithium and valproic acid were commonly used as MSs in all phases of bipolar disorder. KMAP-BP 2022 guidelines were similar to other guidelines, reflecting current changes in prescription patterns for bipolar disorder based on accumulated research data. Strong preference for combination therapy was characteristic of KMAP-BP 2022, predominantly in the treatment of psychotic mania, mixed mania and psychotic depression.

Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder 2022, Fifth Revision: An Executive Summary

OBJECTIVE

We revised the Korean Medication Algorithm Project for Bipolar Disorder (KMAP-BP), first published in 2002 and revised in 2006, 2010, 2014, and 2018, to reflect recent progress in the treatment of bipolar disorder.

METHODS

The questionnaires consisted of 56 items for adult patients and 7 items for child/adolescent patients, and were used to obtain the consensus of experts regarding pharmacological treatment strategies for various phases of bipolar disorder. The review committee included 87 Korean psychiatrists and 40 child and adolescent psychiatry experts.

RESULTS

For treatment of manic episodes, a combination of a mood stabilizer (MS) and atypical antipsychotics (AAP), or monotherapy with MS or AAP were recommended as first-line treatments. Combinations of MS and AAP, or AAP and lamotrigine (LMT) were recommended as first-line treatments for depressive episodes regardless of the severity. Monotherapy with MS, AAP, or LMT were also first-line treatments for mild to moderate depressive episodes. For mixed features, a combination of MS and AAP, or monotherapy with AAP or MS were recommended as first-line treatments, and a combination of AAP and LMT, or MS and LMT were the first-line treatments for depressive mixed state.

CONCLUSION

The recommendations of the KMAP-BP 2022 have changed from the previous version, to reflect the evolution of the social culture and healthcare system in Korea and recent evidence regarding pharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder. The KMAP-BP 2022 provides clinicians with a wealth of information regarding appropriate strategies to treat patients with bipolar disorder.

Lamotrigine and Lithium Combination for Treatment of Rapid Cycling Bipolar Disorder: Results From Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to observe the effect of combination of lithium and lamotrigine in treatment of rapid-cycling bipolar disorder (RCBD).

METHOD

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library in English and CBM, CNKI, WANFANG, and CSSCI in Chinese to find literature from 1 January 2000 to 31 December 2020 related to the combination of lithium carbonate and lamotrigine for treatment of RCBD.

RESULTS

Five comparison studies with 265 subjects of 131 cases in a study group and 134 cases in a control group met the inclusion criteria and were included for the final meta-analysis. The comprehensive analysis shows that the study group had a significant lower score in mental symptoms than the control group (Z = 2.34, P = 0.02) with a random model (X ² = 33.02, df = 7, P < 0.01). However, the differences were only shown in PANSS (Z = 5.18, P < 0.01) and BPRS (Z = 3.08, P < 0.01). There was no difference in response rate (54.9 vs. 45.7%; OR = 1.47; 95% CI: 0.79~2.73; Z = 1.21, P > 0.05,) and remission rate (47.9 vs. 45.9%; OR = 1.05; 95% CI: 0.49~2.25; Z = 0.13, P > 0.05,) found between the two groups. The response rate of lamotrigine and lithium combination was significantly higher compare to that of monotherapy of lithium in patients with no treatment resistant (82 vs. 54%; OR = 4.26; 95% CI: 1.65~10.99; Z = 3.99, P < 0.01) with the fixed effect model (X ² = 0.89, df = 1, P > 0.05, I ² = 0%).

CONCLUSION

The combination of lithium and lamotrigine resulted in better improvement of psychotic symptoms and higher response rate in patients with RCBP with no treatment resistant.