Benefits and harms of low and high second-generation antipsychotics doses for bipolar depression: A meta-analysis

Long-acting injectable antipsychotics for the treatment of bipolar disorder: evidence from mirror-image studies

Clinical trials and real-world data have shown that long-acting injectable antipsychotics (LAIs) might be an effective therapeutic option also for people with bipolar disorder (BD). However, complementing evidence from mirror-image studies investigating LAIs in BD is scattered and has not been systematically evaluated so far. We thus performed a review of observational mirror-image studies testing the effectiveness of LAI treatment on clinical outcomes in people with BD. Embase, MEDLINE, and PsycInfo electronic databases were systematically searched (via Ovid) up to November 2022. We included six mirror-image studies that compared relevant clinical outcomes between the 12-months after (post-treatment period) and the 12-months before (pre-treatment period) the initiation of a LAI treatment in adults with BD. We found that LAI treatment is associated with a significant reduction in days spent in hospital and number of hospitalizations. Moreover, LAI treatment seems to be associated with a significant decrease in the proportion of individuals with at least one hospital admission, even though data on this outcome were reported by just two studies. In addition, studies consistently estimated a significant reduction of hypo-/manic relapses after LAI treatment initiation, while the effect of LAIs for depressive episodes is less clear. Finally, LAI treatment initiation was associated with a lower number of emergency department visits in the year after LAI initiation. The findings of this review seem to suggest that the use of LAIs is an effective strategy to improve major clinical outcomes in people with BD. Nonetheless, additional research, based on standardized assessments of prevalent polarity and relapses, is needed to identify the clinical characteristics of individuals with BD who are most likely to benefit from a LAI treatment.

Sex-specific associations between metabolic hormones, severe mental disorders and antipsychotic treatment

BACKGROUND

Metabolic dysregulation has been associated with severe mental disorders (SMD) and with antipsychotic (AP) treatment, but the role of sex is unknown. To identify possible sex-related processes linked to SMD and AP treatment, we investigated sex differences in associations between hormones involved in metabolic regulation in patients with SMD compared to healthy controls (HC) and AP treatment.

METHODS

We included patients with SMD (N = 1753) and HC (N = 1194) and measured hormones involved in metabolic regulation (insulin, cortisol, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), thyroxine, leptin, adiponectin, testosterone, sex hormone-binding globulin (SHBG), prolactin). Patients were grouped according to use of first-generation AP (N = 163), second-generation AP (N = 1087) or no use of AP (N = 503). Hormones were used one by one as dependent variables in multiple regression analyses with interactions between sex and SMD patients versus HC, and between sex and AP treatment, followed by analyses in males and females separately.

RESULTS

We found significant interactions between sex and SMD patients versus HC for testosterone, SHBG and adiponectin, with significantly higher testosterone and lower adiponectin levels in females. Furthermore, we found significant interaction between sex and AP groups for TSH, testosterone and insulin, with significantly lower TSH levels in AP-treated females, and lower testosterone and higher insulin levels in AP-treated males.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest sex differences in metabolic hormones related to both SMD and AP treatment, indicating sex-dependent mechanisms. Clinicians should be aware of potential sex-specific metabolic changes during AP treatment and experimental studies are warranted to clarify the underlying mechanisms.

Characteristics Associated with Depression Severity in 270 Juveniles in a Major Depressive Episode

Introduction: Severe depression is prevalent in young persons and can lead to disability and elevated suicidal risk. Objectives: To identify clinical and demographic factors associated with the severity of depression in juveniles diagnosed with a major mood disorder, as a contribution to improving clinical treatment and reducing risk of suicide. Methods: We analyzed factors associated with depression severity in 270 juveniles (aged 6-18 years) in a major depressive episode, evaluated and treated at the Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital of Rome. Depressive symptoms were rated with the revised Children's Depression Rating Scale (CDRS-R) and manic symptoms with the Kiddie Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia (K-SADS) Mania Rating Scale (K-SADS-MRS). Bivariate comparisons were followed by multivariable linear regression modeling. Results: Depression severity was greater among females than males (55.0 vs. 47.2), with the diagnosis of a major depressive disorder (MDD) vs. bipolar disorder (BD; 53.8 vs. 49.3), and tended to increase with age (slope = 1.14). Some symptoms typical of mania were associated with greater depression severity, including mood lability, hallucinations, delusions, and irritability, whereas less likely symptoms were hyperactivity, pressured speech, grandiosity, high energy, and distractibility. Factors independently and significantly associated with greater depression severity in multivariable linear regression modeling were: MDD vs. BD diagnosis, female sex, higher anxiety ratings, mood lability, and irritability. Conclusions: Severe depression was significantly associated with female sex, the presence of some manic or psychotic symptoms, and with apparent unipolar MDD. Manic/psychotic symptoms should be assessed carefully when evaluating a juvenile depressive episode and considered in treatment planning in an effort to balance risks of antidepressants and the potential value of mood-stabilizing and antimanic agents to decrease the severity of acute episodes and reduce suicidal risk.

Clinical correlates of DSM-5 mixed features in bipolar disorder: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Systematic data on clinical correlates of mixed features in bipolar disorder are not available, so far. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis estimating the association between DSM-5 mixed features and candidate characteristics in depressive and manic/hypomanic episodes.

METHODS

We included observational studies indexed in the main electronic databases. The association between DSM-5 mixed features and relevant correlates was estimated using odds ratio (OR) and standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), for categorical and continuous variables, respectively. Analyses were based on random effects models.

RESULTS

Eight studies were included, involving 3070 individuals (1495 with a major depressive episode and 1575 with hypo/manic episode). No clinical characteristics were associated with mixed features in subjects with a depressive episode. Among subjects with a manic/hypomanic episode, those with mixed features were more likely to have a history of suicide attempts (OR: 2.37; 95%CI: 1.42 to 3.94; I²=39.7%), co-occurring anxiety disorders (OR: 2.67; 95%CI: 1.28 to 5.57; I²=0%), and a rapid cycling course (OR=4.23; 95%CI: 1.29 to 13.81; I²=0%), with less severe manic symptoms (SMD=-0.40; 95%CI: -0.65 to -0.16; I²=0%).

LIMITATIONS

(1) the heterogeneity of methods across studies and the inconsistency of findings; (2) the limited amount of data on correlates of DSM-5 mixed features; (3) the possible influence of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this meta-analysis show that mixed features among individuals with a manic/hypomanic episode may identify a special clinical population, characterized not only by depressive symptoms, but also by anxiety, rapid cycling, and suicidality.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).

Antidepressants in Bipolar Depression: An Enduring Controversy

(Reprinted with permission from Int J Bipolar Discord (2018) 6:25).

Antidepressants in bipolar depression: an enduring controversy

The proper place and the optimal use of antidepressants in treating bipolar depression continues to be an area of great interest and greater controversy with passionate opinions more common than good studies. Even the handful of meta-analyses in the area disagree with each other. Overall, the evidence that antidepressants are effective in treating bipolar depression is weak. Additionally, many experts and clinicians worry greatly about the capacity of antidepressants to cause affective switching or mood destabilization. Yet, in short term controlled studies, with most patients also taking mood stabilizers, antidepressants are not associated with switches into mania/hypomania. Evidence of cycle acceleration with antidepressants primarily reflects treatment with older antidepressants, e.g., tricyclics. Similar evidence with modern antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is lacking. The key questions should not be: are antidepressants effective in bipolar depression?; And: do antidepressants worsen the course of bipolar disorder? Rather, the question should be focused on subgroups: for which patients are antidepressants helpful and safe, and for which patients will they be harmful? Predictors of affective switching with antidepressants include: bipolar I disorder (vs. bipolar II), mixed features during depression, tricyclics vs. modern antidepressants, rapid cycling and possibly a history of drug abuse, especially stimulant abuse. Additionally, a number of recent studies have demonstrated both the safety and efficacy of antidepressant monotherapy in treating bipolar II depression. Finally, a subgroup of bipolar individuals need antidepressants in addition to mood stabilizers as part of an optimal maintenance treatment regimen.

Vagus Nerve Stimulation (VNS) and Other Augmentation Strategies for Therapy-Resistant Depression (TRD): Review of the Evidence and Clinical Advice for Use

In addition to electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation (rTMS), vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is one of the approved neurostimulation tools for treatment of major depression. VNS is particularly used in therapy-resistant depression (TRD) and exhibits antidepressive and augmentative effects. In long-term treatment, up to two-thirds of patients respond. This mini-review provides a comprehensive overview of augmentation pharmacotherapy and neurostimulation-based treatment strategies, with a special focus on VNS in TRD, and provides practical clinical advice for how to select TRD patients for add-on neurostimulation treatment strategies.

Effect of clinical response to active drugs and placebo on antipsychotics and mood stabilizers relative efficacy for bipolar depression and mania: A meta-regression analysis

BACKGROUND

Randomised placebo-controlled trials investigating treatments for bipolar disorder have been hampered by wide variations of active drugs and placebo clinical response rates. It is important to estimate whether the active drug or placebo response has a greater influence in determining the relative efficacy of drugs for psychosis (antipsychotics) and relapse prevention (mood stabilisers) for bipolar depression and mania.

METHODS

We identified 53 randomised, placebo-controlled trials assessing antipsychotic or mood stabiliser monotherapy ('active drugs') for bipolar depression or mania. We carried out random-effects meta-regressions, estimating the influence of active drugs and placebo response rates on treatment relative efficacy.

RESULTS

Meta-regressions showed that treatment relative efficacy for bipolar mania was influenced by the magnitude of clinical response to active drugs ( p=0.002), but not to placebo ( p=0.60). On the other hand, treatment relative efficacy for bipolar depression was influenced by response to placebo ( p=0.047), but not to active drugs ( p=0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Despite several limitations, our unexpected findings showed that antipsychotics / mood stabilisers relative efficacy for bipolar depression seems unrelated to active drugs response rates, depending only on clinical response to placebo. Future research should explore strategies to reduce placebo-related issues in randomised, placebo-controlled trials for bipolar depression.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept trial of creatine monohydrate as adjunctive treatment for bipolar depression

Depressive episodes are a major cause of morbidity and dysfunction in individuals suffering from bipolar disorder. Currently available treatments for this condition have limited efficacy and new therapeutic options are needed. Extensive research in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder points to the existence of mitochondrial and bioenergetic dysfunction. We hypothesized that creatine monohydrate, a nutraceutical that works as a mitochondrial modulator, would be effective as an adjunctive therapy for bipolar depression. We conducted a double-blind trial in which 35 patients with bipolar disorder type I or II in a depressive episode by DSM-IV criteria and in use of regular medication for the treatment of this phase of the disease were randomly allocated into two adjunctive treatment groups for 6 weeks: creatine monohydrate 6 g daily (N = 17) or placebo (N = 18). Primary efficacy was assessed by the change in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). We did not find a statistically significant difference in the comparison between groups for the change in score on the MADRS after 6 weeks in an intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (p = 0.560; Cohen’s d = 0.231). However, we found significant superiority of creatine add-on vs. placebo when we considered the remission criterion of a MADRS score ≤ 12 at week 6 analyzing the outcome of the 35 randomized patients on ITT (52.9% remission in the creatine group vs. 11.1% remission in the placebo group) and of the 23 completers (66.7% remission in the creatine group vs. 18.2% remission in the placebo group) (p = 0.012; OR = 9.0 and p = 0.036; OR = 9.0, respectively). Two patients who received creatine switched to hypomania/mania early in the trial. No clinically relevant physical side-effects were reported or observed. This proof-of-concept study, aiming to restore brain bioenergetics using an adjunctive mitochondrial modulator, is not conclusive on the efficacy of creatine add-on for bipolar depression, but suggests that this compound may have a role in the adjunctive treatment of this phase of the illness. Further investigation through randomized controlled trials with larger samples should be conducted to verify the efficacy of creatine supplementation for bipolar depression and also for subsyndromal depressive symptoms.

Improving physical health of patients with severe mental disorders: a critical review of lifestyle psychosocial interventions

INTRODUCTION

People with severe mental disorders have a mortality rate that is more than two times higher than the general population, with at least a decade of potential years of life lost. People with mental disorders have a significantly higher risk of obesity, hyperglycemia and metabolic syndrome, which are related to modifiable risk factors, such as heavy smoking, poor physical activities, and inappropriate unhealthy diet, which can be improved through lifestyle changes. Areas covered: Lifestyle behaviours are amenable to change through the adoption of specific psychosocial interventions, and several approaches have been promoted. In the present review, the authors aim to: 1) critically analyze studies involving multimodal lifestyle interventions; 2) discuss the way forward to integrate these interventions in clinical routine care. Expert commentary: The psychoeducational approaches developed for the improvement of healthy lifestyle behaviours differ for several aspects: 1) the format (individual vs. group); 2) the setting (outpatient vs. inpatient vs. home-based); 3) the professional characteristics of the staff running the intervention (psychiatrists or nurses or dietitians or psychologists); 4) the active ingredients of the intervention (education only or inclusion of motivational interview or of problem solving); 5) the duration of treatment (ranging from 3 months to 2 years).