Level of response and safety of pharmacological monotherapy in the treatment of acute bipolar I disorder phases: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Brain stimulation treatment for bipolar disorder

AIMS

Bipolar disorders are clinically complex, chronic and recurrent disorders. Few treatment options are effective across hypomanic, manic, depressive and mixed states and as continuation or maintenance treatment after initial symptom remission. The aim of this review was to provide an up-to-date overview of research on the efficacy, tolerability and cognitive effects of electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), transcranial magnetic stimulation (TMS), transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS), magnetic seizure therapy (MST), deep brain stimulation (DBS) and vagus nerve stimulation (VNS).

METHODS

References included in this review were identified through multiple searches of the Embase, PubMed/MEDLINE and APA PsycINFO electronic databases for articles published from inception until February 2022. Published reviews, meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and recent studies were prioritised to provide a comprehensive and up-to-date overview of research on brain stimulation in patients with bipolar disorders.

RESULTS

The evidence base for brain stimulation as an add-on or alternative to pharmacological and psychological treatments in patients with bipolar disorders is limited but rapidly expanding. Brain stimulation treatments represent an opportunity to treat all bipolar disorder states, including cognitive dysfunction during euthymic periods.

CONCLUSION

Whilst findings to date have been encouraging, larger randomised controlled trials with long-term follow-up are needed to clarify important questions regarding treatment efficacy and tolerability, the frequency of treatment-emergent affective switches and effects on cognitive function.

Acetazolamide for Bipolar Disorders: A Scoping Review

Acetazolamide, a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, is used to treat a variety of ailments. It has been highlighted for its potential to benefit people with bipolar disorders, for whom there are clear current unmet treatment needs. This scoping review sought to synthesise all available evidence related to the potential effects of acetazolamide on symptoms related to bipolar disorder, acceptability and tolerability, and intervention characteristics (e.g., dose and duration). Following publication of the review protocol, the Pubmed, Embase, and PsycInfo databases were searched (all dated to 31 August 2022). A systematic approach was undertaken to identify eligible articles and extract relevant data from these. Five studies were included, assessing a total of 50 patients treated with acetazolamide. Most patients were from two open-label trials, while the others were case reports. Approximately one third of patients were experiencing psychosis or mania before treatment initiation, and one third had refractory depression. Forty-four percent of patients were estimated to achieve a response (not seemingly affected by the baseline episode type, acetazolamide dose, or duration), while a further 22% appeared to experience minimal benefits from the intervention. Acetazolamide was generally reported to be tolerated well and acceptable for up to 2 years, although reporting for acceptability and tolerability was suboptimal. The reviewed evidence is extremely limited in size and methodology (e.g., no randomised studies, blinding, or standardised outcome assessment). We posit that the current findings are sufficiently encouraging to recommend substantive clinical trials, but we emphasise that at present, the evidence is exceedingly preliminary, and there remains evident uncertainty as to whether acetazolamide could be a viable treatment for bipolar disorders.

A cumulative Bayesian network meta-analysis on the comparative efficacy of pharmacotherapies for mania over the last 40 years

RATIONALE

Mania (or manic episodes) is a common symptom of bipolar disorder and is frequently accompanied by hyperactivity and delusions; given the cost and resources available, there is a paucity of evidence for direct comparison of different drugs.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations on the efficacy of overall currently used pharmacological treatments for patients with acute bipolar mania.

METHOD

We conducted a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) using a Bayesian network frame. We searched the primary literature databases without language restrictions until Dec 18, 2021, for reports of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of suspected antimanic drugs used as monotherapy for patients with acute bipolar mania, with the primary outcomes being efficacy (mean difference (MD), standardized mean difference (SMD) in the change of mania score).

RESULTS

Eighty-seven studies were included in which 18,724 manic participants (mean age = 34.6 years, with 50.36% males) were allocated at random to one of 25 active medication drug therapies or placebo, resulting in 87 direct comparisons on 192 data points. Tamoxifen (- 22·00 [- 26·00 to - 18·00]) had the best efficacy over the placebo. Meanwhile, risperidone (- 6·60 [- 8·40 to - 4·90]) was substantially more effective than placebo in treating acute mania. Carbamazepine, haloperidol, ziprasidone, cariprazine, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, lithium, paliperidone, asenapine, and divalproex were noticeably more effective than placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, tamoxifen appears to be the most effective of the currently known pharmaceutical therapy available to treat acute mania or manic episodes; however, this conclusion is restricted by the scale of RCTs conducted, and risperidone was found to be the most effective medication among antipsychotics. Carbamazepine, haloperidol, ziprasidone, cariprazine, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, lithium, paliperidone, asenapine, and divalproex were noticeably effective in treating acute mania or manic episodes.

Acute and Maintenance Treatment of Bipolar Depression

The World Health Organization reported a lifetime prevalence of 2.4% for BD-I, BD-II and sub-threshold types of bipolar disorder (BD). Depressive episodes are more common than manic episodes for many BD patients. Studies show that depressive mood persists in 2/3 of life, even if they are under treatment. It may be difficult to diagnose BD in the event of depression in the first episode. The correct diagnosis and the treatment can be delayed for 6-8 years, and even longer if disorder starts in adolescence. It is reported that 40% of the patients who were initially diagnosed as unipolar were later diagnosed as BD. The features that enable us to diagnose BD depressive episode: 1) family history of BD or psychosis 2) early onset with depression 3) cyclothymic temperament characteristics 4) four or more depressive episodes in 10 years 5) agitation, anger, insomnia, irritability, excessive talkativeness or other 'mixed' or hypomanic features or psychotic symptoms during depressive episode, 6) clinical 'worsening' caused by the appearance of mixed symptoms after AD treatment 7) suicidal thoughts and attempts 8) substance abuse 9) hypersomnia in the depressive episode or sleeping too much during the day, overeating, psychomotor agitation. The number of studies conducted on BD depressive treatment is limited, the information was obtained by excluding this group from the studies or by compiling the information obtained from the treatment of unipolar depression. In this review, acute and maintenance treatment of the depressive episodes of BD will be discussed according to the treatment algorithms.

Electroconvulsive Therapy in Mania: A Review of 80 Years of Clinical Experience

Resistance to pharmacological agents is commonly encountered in the treatment of acute episodes of mania. In contemporary practice guidelines, electroconvulsive therapy (ECT), once a widely used standalone intervention for mania, is no longer considered a first-line treatment. Stigma, logistics, and ethical factors constrain ECT administration in this condition and lead to its underutilization. However, the past three decades have produced promising research regarding the use of ECT in mania. Randomized controlled trials, albeit in limited numbers, the adoption of ultrabrief ECT, examination of the safety and efficacy of combining ECT with pharmacological agents, including lithium, and use of ECT as a maintenance strategy have enhanced our understanding of how and when to utilize this intervention in mania. In this comprehensive review, the authors summarize the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of ECT in mania, including related syndromes, such as delirious mania and mixed affective states. The impact of technical parameters, particularly the choice of treatment frequency, electrode placements, and pulse width, are discussed in the light of recent evidence.

The efficacy and safety of sulforaphane as an adjuvant in the treatment of bipolar depressive disorder: Study protocol for a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a chronic and disabling psychiatric disorder. The treatment of BD still remains a significant clinical challenge due to the complex nature of the disease. Nutraceutical therapy as adjunctive role is a promising therapy for BD. Sulforaphane (SFN), a broccoli extract, was reported to be effective for emotional problems and cognitive impairment. However, clinical research of SFN in the treatment of BD was rare. Therefore, this study is designed to evaluate the adjuvant role of SFN in the treatment of BD.

METHODS

This is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. A total of 100 patients who meet inclusion criteria will be assigned to receive quetiapine plus SFN or quetiapine plus placebo in a 1:1 ratio. The total duration of the study will be 12 weeks including 5 follow ups. The primary outcome is in the Montgomery-Asberg depression rating scale. The secondary outcomes are the quick inventory of depressive symptomatology-self report, Hamilton anxiety rating scale, young mania rating scale, cognitive function, inflammatory factors, and intestinal flora. Any adverse events will be recorded throughout the trial.

DISCUSSION

This trial will provide evidences to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SFN combined with quetiapine in the treatment of BD patients, as well as the adjuvant role of SFN in combination.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study protocol was registered at the Chinese clinical trial registry (ChiCTR2000028706).

Bipolar depression: a major unsolved challenge

Depression in bipolar disorder (BD) patients presents major clinical challenges. As the predominant psychopathology even in treated BD, depression is associated not only with excess morbidity, but also mortality from co-occurring general-medical disorders and high suicide risk. In BD, risks for medical disorders including diabetes or metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disorders, and associated mortality rates are several-times above those for the general population or with other psychiatric disorders. The SMR for suicide with BD reaches 20-times above general-population rates, and exceeds rates with other major psychiatric disorders. In BD, suicide is strongly associated with mixed (agitated-dysphoric) and depressive phases, time depressed, and hospitalization. Lithium may reduce suicide risk in BD; clozapine and ketamine require further testing. Treatment of bipolar depression is far less well investigated than unipolar depression, particularly for long-term prophylaxis. Short-term efficacy of antidepressants for bipolar depression remains controversial and they risk clinical worsening, especially in mixed states and with rapid-cycling. Evidence of efficacy of lithium and anticonvulsants for bipolar depression is very limited; lamotrigine has long-term benefit, but valproate and carbamazepine are inadequately tested and carry high teratogenic risks. Evidence is emerging of short-term efficacy of several modern antipsychotics (including cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and quetiapine) for bipolar depression, including with mixed features, though they risk adverse metabolic and neurological effects.

On the evidence consistency of pharmacovigilance outcomes between Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System and electronic medical record data for acute mania patients

Evaluation of premarketing drug safety in clinical trials is often limited, due to the relatively small sample size and short follow-up time. The data collected in the postmarketing spontaneous reporting systems such as Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System as well as electronic medical record systems provide crucial information to evaluate postmarketing drug safety. In this article, we assess the strengths and limitations of Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System and electronic medical record data in studying the postmarketing pharmacovigilance outcomes for 12 selected antidepressant drugs. In addition, we evaluate the consistency of the results obtained from these two data sources, and provide potential directions for evidence integration.

Pharmacological treatment of adult bipolar disorder

We summarize evidence supporting contemporary pharmacological treatment of phases of BD, including: mania, depression, and long-term recurrences, emphasizing findings from randomized, controlled trials (RCTs). Effective treatment of acute or dysphoric mania is provided by modern antipsychotics, some anticonvulsants (divalproex and carbamazepine), and lithium salts. Treatment of BD-depression remains unsatisfactory but includes some modern antipsychotics (particularly lurasidone, olanzapine + fluoxetine, and quetiapine) and the anticonvulsant lamotrigine; value and safety of antidepressants remain controversial. Long-term prophylactic treatment relies on lithium, off-label use of valproate, and growing use of modern antipsychotics. Lithium has unique evidence of antisuicide effects. Methods of evaluating treatments for BD rely heavily on meta-analysis, which is convenient but with important limitations. Underdeveloped treatment for BD-depression may reflect an assumption that effects of antidepressants are similar in BD as in unipolar major depressive disorder. Effective prophylaxis of BD is limited by the efficacy of available treatments and incomplete adherence owing to adverse effects, costs, and lack of ongoing symptoms. Long-term treatment of BD also is limited by access to, and support of expert, comprehensive clinical programs. Pursuit of improved, rationally designed pharmacological treatments for BD, as for most psychiatric disorders, is fundamentally limited by lack of coherent pathophysiology or etiology.

Outcome and predictors of remission in bipolar-I patients experiencing manic episode and treated with oral antipsychotics and/or mood stabilizers: a prospective observational study in Italy

This observational study aimed to identify internal (clinical-demographic, temperamental characteristics) and external (childhood trauma, psychosocial characteristics) factors potentially predicting remission at 12 weeks in bipolar-I patients experiencing manic episode and requiring to start or switch treatment with oral antipsychotics and/or mood stabilizers. The following scales were administered: the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST), and the Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorders (CGI-BP). A logistic regression analysis was carried out to test the effect of the explored factors on remission rate (YMRS score ≤12), functionality, and clinical outcomes at week 12. Overall, 243 patients were enrolled and 197 (81.1%) completed the follow-up. Remission at week 12 was achieved in 200 (82.3%) patients. Marked improvements from baseline were observed in MADRS, FAST, CGI-BP mania, and bipolar illness scores. None of the factors was associated with remission, or showed strong correlations with the improvements in clinical health state. In our sample, after 12 weeks of initiation or change of oral therapy for mania in bipolar-I patients, treatment was associated with rapid improvements in symptoms and functioning in most patients. Factors predictive of remission and clinical improvements in manic symptoms were not identified.

Clinically relevant response and remission outcomes in cariprazine-treated patients with bipolar I disorder

BACKGROUND

Rates of response and remission are measures that endorse the clinical significance of treatment. Cariprazine is FDA approved for the acute treatment of schizophrenia and manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder in adults. Post hoc analyses of pooled data from 3 pivotal trials of cariprazine in manic/mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder were conducted to investigate the effect of cariprazine on various criteria of response and remission.

METHODS

The constituent studies were 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter, parallel-group phase II/III studies in adult patients (age 18-65 years) with bipolar I disorder (NCT00488618, NCT01058096, NCT01058668). Post hoc analyses included Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) outcomes for response (≥50% decrease in score), remission (total score ≤12 and ≤8), cumulative remission, and global improvement. Additionally, composite remission (YMRS total score ≤12 plus Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale total score ≤12) and worsening/switch to depression (MADRS total score ≥15) by week were investigated.

RESULTS

Rates of response and remission were significantly greater for cariprazine versus placebo on every measure evaluated (P < .01 all analyses); the estimated number needed to treat for each measure was ≤10. There was no evidence of worsening/switch to depression.

LIMITATIONS

Post hoc analyses, short treatment duration, no active comparator.

DISCUSSION

Cariprazine-treated patients with bipolar I disorder attained clinically significant improvement in manic symptoms as shown by significantly greater rates of response and remission versus placebo; improvement in manic symptoms did not induce depressive symptoms.

Pharmacological treatment of bipolar depression

Bipolar depression remains a major challenge for psychiatric therapeutics. It is associated with disability and excess mortality, and accounts for three-quarters of the time spent in morbid states by treated patients with bipolar disorder. Major limitations of research on the treatment of depression in bipolar disorder include a paucity of short-term and lack of long-term trials, probably reflecting concern about inducing mania. In addition, polytherapy with multiple drugs appears to be widespread, but it is virtually untested for efficacy and safety. Here, we summarise the evidence concerning efficacy of treatment of bipolar depression with antidepressants, mood-stabilising anticonvulsants, lithium and second-generation antipsychotics.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

•

Net gain analysis, an addition to responder analysis--The case of antipsychotic treatment of acute mania

Net Gain Analysis (NGA) is proposed as an alternative to Responders Analysis (RA) as a more comprehensive method to tap clinical relevance of the effect of treatment. NGA is the group difference in responders minus the group difference in deteriorators; while RA is the group difference in responders. We examined the performance of these two methods in a dataset consisting of individual patient data from 10 randomized controlled trials (N = 2666) of five different antipsychotics in patients with acute mania by comparing the rank ordering of the five compounds according to both systems (NGA and RA). The rank order did not differ between the 2 systems but the inferiority of one compound was revealed more evidently by the NGA in comparison to the RA.

Cariprazine in the treatment of acute mania in bipolar I disorder: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial

BACKGROUND

This Phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of flexibly-dosed cariprazine in patients with acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to 3 weeks of double-blind treatment with cariprazine 3-12mg/day (n=158) or placebo (n=154). The primary efficacy parameter was change from baseline to Week 3 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score. The secondary efficacy parameter was change from baseline to Week 3 in Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) score.

RESULTS

Mean change from baseline to Week 3 in YMRS total score was significantly greater for patients receiving cariprazine 3-12mg/day versus placebo (P=0.0004). Significant differences between groups in YMRS total score mean change were observed by Day 4 (first postbaseline assessment) and maintained throughout double-blind treatment (all assessments, P<0.01). Cariprazine also demonstrated statistically significant superiority over placebo on YMRS response (≥50% improvement: cariprazine, 58.9%; placebo, 44.1%; P=0.0097) and remission (YMRS total score≤12: cariprazine, 51.9%; placebo, 34.9%; P=0.0025) and mean change in CGI-S (P=0.0027) score and Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) (P=0.0035) total score. The most common cariprazine-related (≥10% and twice placebo) treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were akathisia, extrapyramidal disorder, tremor, dyspepsia, and vomiting. Mean change from baseline in metabolic parameters were generally small and similar between groups.

LIMITATIONS

Lack of active comparator arm; short duration of study.

CONCLUSION

In this study, cariprazine 3-12mg/day was effective and generally well tolerated in the treatment of manic and mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

The efficacy and tolerability of cariprazine in acute mania associated with bipolar I disorder: a phase II trial

OBJECTIVES

Cariprazine, an orally active and potent dopamine D3 and D2 receptor partial agonist with preferential binding to D3 receptors, is being developed for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar mania. This Phase II trial evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine versus placebo in the treatment of acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

METHODS

This was a multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, flexible-dose study of cariprazine 3-12 mg/day in patients with acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. Following washout, patients received three weeks of double-blind treatment. The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were change from baseline to Week 3 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinical Global Impressions-Severity (CGI-S) scores, respectively. Post-hoc analysis evaluated changes on YMRS single items.

RESULTS

In each group, 118 patients received double-blind treatment; 61.9% of placebo and 63.6% of cariprazine patients completed the study. The overall mean daily dose of cariprazine was 8.8 mg/day. At Week 3, cariprazine significantly reduced YMRS and CGI-S scores versus placebo, with least square mean differences of -6.1 (p < 0.001) and -0.6 (p < 0.001), respectively. On each YMRS item, change from baseline to Week 3 was significantly greater for cariprazine versus placebo (all, p < 0.05). A significantly greater percentage of cariprazine patients than placebo patients met YMRS response (48% versus 25%; p < 0.001) and remission (42% versus 23%; p = 0.002) criteria at Week 3. Adverse events (AEs) led to discontinuation of 12 (10%) placebo and 17 (14%) cariprazine patients. The most common AEs (> 10% for cariprazine) were extrapyramidal disorder, headache, akathisia, constipation, nausea, and dyspepsia. Changes in metabolic parameters were similar between groups, with the exception of fasting glucose; increases in glucose were significantly greater for cariprazine versus placebo (p < 0.05). Based on Barnes Akathisia Rating Scale and Simpson-Angus Scale scores, more cariprazine than placebo patients experienced treatment-emergent akathisia (cariprazine: 22%; placebo: 6%) or extrapyramidal symptoms (parkinsonism) (cariprazine: 16%; placebo: 1%).

CONCLUSION

Cariprazine demonstrated superior efficacy versus placebo and was generally well tolerated in patients experiencing acute manic or mixed episodes associated with bipolar I disorder.

Role of quetiapine beyond its clinical efficacy in bipolar disorder: From neuroprotection to the treatment of psychiatric disorders (Review)

The aim of the present review was to discuss the following aspects of treatment with quetiapine in psychiatric disorders: i) Neurocognition and functional recovery in bipolar disorder (BD); ii) neuroprotective profile in different models; and iii) potential off-label indications. A PubMed search was conducted of articles published in English between 2000 and 2012 on quetiapine, cross-referenced with the terms ‘anxiety’, ‘attention deficit disorder’, ‘borderline personality disorder’, ‘dementia’, ‘insomnia’, ‘major depressive disorder’ (MDD), ‘obsessive-compulsive disorder’, ‘post-traumatic stress disorder’, ‘remission’, ‘cognition’, ‘neurobiology’, ‘neuroprotection’, ‘efficacy’ and ‘effectiveness’. Articles were selected from meta-analyses, randomized clinical trials and open trials, and the results were summarized. Quetiapine, when studied in off-label conditions, has shown efficacy as a monotherapy in MDD and general anxiety disorder. Quetiapine also appears to exhibit a small beneficial effect in dementia. The review of other conditions was affected by methodological limitations that precluded any definitive conclusions on the efficacy or safety of quetiapine. Overall, the present review shows evidence supporting a potential role for quetiapine in improving cognition, functional recovery and negative symptoms in a cost-effective manner in BD. These benefits of quetiapine are potentially associated with its well-described neuroprotective effects; however, further studies are clearly warranted.

Treatment of bipolar disorders during pregnancy: maternal and fetal safety and challenges

Treating pregnant women with bipolar disorder is among the most challenging clinical endeavors. Patients and clinicians are faced with difficult choices at every turn, and no approach is without risk. Stopping effective pharmacotherapy during pregnancy exposes the patient and her baby to potential harms related to bipolar relapses and residual mood symptom-related dysfunction. Continuing effective pharmacotherapy during pregnancy may prevent these occurrences for many; however, some of the most effective pharmacotherapies (such as valproate) have been associated with the occurrence of congenital malformations or other adverse neonatal effects in offspring. Very little is known about the reproductive safety profile and clinical effectiveness of atypical antipsychotic drugs when used to treat bipolar disorder during pregnancy. In this paper, we provide a clinically focused review of the available information on potential maternal and fetal risks of untreated or undertreated maternal bipolar disorder during pregnancy, the effectiveness of interventions for bipolar disorder management during pregnancy, and potential obstetric, fetal, and neonatal risks associated with core foundational pharmacotherapies for bipolar disorder.

The psychopharmacology algorithm project at the Harvard South Shore Program: an algorithm for acute mania

This new algorithm for the pharmacotherapy of acute mania was developed by the Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program. The authors conducted a literature search in PubMed and reviewed key studies, other algorithms and guidelines, and their references. Treatments were prioritized considering three main considerations: (1) effectiveness in treating the current episode, (2) preventing potential relapses to depression, and (3) minimizing side effects over the short and long term. The algorithm presupposes that clinicians have made an accurate diagnosis, decided how to manage contributing medical causes (including substance misuse), discontinued antidepressants, and considered the patient's childbearing potential. We propose different algorithms for mixed and nonmixed mania. Patients with mixed mania may be treated first with a second-generation antipsychotic, of which the first choice is quetiapine because of its greater efficacy for depressive symptoms and episodes in bipolar disorder. Valproate and then either lithium or carbamazepine may be added. For nonmixed mania, lithium is the first-line recommendation. A second-generation antipsychotic can be added. Again, quetiapine is favored, but if quetiapine is unacceptable, risperidone is the next choice. Olanzapine is not considered a first-line treatment due to its long-term side effects, but it could be second-line. If the patient, whether mixed or nonmixed, is still refractory to the above medications, then depending on what has already been tried, consider carbamazepine, haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, and valproate first tier; aripiprazole, asenapine, and ziprasidone second tier; and clozapine third tier (because of its weaker evidence base and greater side effects). Electroconvulsive therapy may be considered at any point in the algorithm if the patient has a history of positive response or is intolerant of medications.

Clinical implications of predominant polarity and the polarity index in bipolar disorder: a naturalistic study

OBJECTIVE

Predominant polarity (PP) is an important variable in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This study aimed at determining the role of polarity index (PI), a metric indicating antimanic versus antidepressive prophylactic potential of drugs, in clinical decision-making.

METHOD

Two hundred and fifty-seven of 604 (43%) of patients with BD-I or II fulfilled criteria for manic (MPP) or depressive PP (DPP). The PI, representing the ratio of number needed to treat (NNT) for depression prevention to NNT for mania prevention, was calculated for patients' current treatment. MPP and DPP groups were compared regarding sociodemographic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-three patients (55.6%) fulfilled criteria for DPP and 114 (44.4%) for MPP. Total PI, Antipsychotics' PI, and mood stabilizers PI were higher, indicating a stronger antimanic action, in MPP. MPP presented higher prevalence of BD-I, male gender, younger age, age at onset and at first hospitalization, more hospitalizations, primary substance misuse, and psychotic symptoms. DP correlated with BD-II, depressive onset, primary life events, melancholia, and suicide attempts.

CONCLUSION

The results confirm the usefulness of the PI. In this large sample, clinical differences among these groups justify differential treatment approach. The PI appears to be a useful operationalization of what clinicians do for maintenance therapy in BD.

Acute inpatient treatment, hospitalization course and direct costs in bipolar patients with intellectual disability

To explore the impacts of intellectual disability (ID) on psychotropic medication use, length of hospital stay (LOS) and direct hospitalization costs during inpatient treatment for acute bipolar episodes, all 17,899 index hospitalizations due to acute bipolar episodes between 1998 and 2007 in Taiwan were identified from a total population health insurance claims database, amongst which 544 subjects had a concomitant diagnosis of ID. Pattern of psychotropic medication use, LOS, discharge outcome and direct costs during hospitalization were compared between bipolar patients with ID and without ID and multivariate models controlling for major cost confounders were used to explore the impacts of ID on LOS, discharge outcome and inpatient costs. The results indicated that, compared to bipolar patients without ID, bipolar patients with ID were younger, had longer LOS and received significantly lower daily equivalent dosages of antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, lithium and benzodiazepines. Significantly more bipolar patients with ID could not be discharged successfully. The longer LOS possibly reflected slower clinical stabilization, conservative use of medications and difficulty in community placement. The lower average daily reimbursements indicated that treatment of bipolar patients with ID were under-funded, whereas the higher total direct costs resulting from prolonged LOS placed greater economic straint on healthcare system. The findings support that bipolar patients with ID are clinically unique but relatively under-supported during acute hospitalization. Modifying current pharmacological intervention, health care resources allocation and community supporting structure is paramount to reducing LOS and improving hospitalization outcome.

Pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder and concordance with treatment guidelines: survey of a general population sample referred to a tertiary care service

BACKGROUND

Many new approaches have been adopted for the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) in the past few years, which strived to produce more positive outcomes. To enhance the quality of care, several guideline recommendations have been developed. For study purposes, we monitored the prescription of psychotropic drugs administered to bipolar patients who had been referred to tertiary care services, and assessed the degree to which treatment met specific guidelines.

METHODS

Between December 2006 and February 2009, we assessed 113 individuals suffering from BD who had been referred to the Royal Ottawa Mental Health Centre (ROMHC) Mood Disorders Program by physicians within the community, mostly general practitioners. The Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR was used to assess diagnosis. The prescribed treatment was compared with specific Canadian guidelines (CANMAT, 2009). Univariate analyses and logistic regression were used to assess the contribution of demographic and clinical factors for concordance of treatment with guidelines.

RESULTS

Thirty-two subjects had BD type I (BD-I), and 81 subjects had BD type II (BD-II). All subjects with BD-I, and 90% of the BD-II group were given at least one psychotropic treatment. Lithium was more often prescribed for subjects with BD-I (62%) than those with BD-II (19%). Antidepressants were the most frequently prescribed class of psychotropics. Sixty-eight percent of subjects received treatment concordant with guidelines by medication and dose. The presence of a current hypomanic episode was independently associated with poorer concordance to guidelines. In more than half the cases, the inappropriate use of antidepressants was at the origin of the non concordance of treatment with respect to guidelines. Absence of psychotropic treatment in bipolar II patients and inadequate dosage of mood stabilizers were the two other main causes of non concordance with guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS

The factors related to treatment not concordant with guidelines should be further explored to determine appropriate strategies in implementing the use of guidelines in clinical practice.

The ARIQUELI study: potentiation of quetiapine in bipolar I nonresponders with lithium versus aripiprazole

BACKGROUND

The treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) remains a challenge due to the complexity of the disease. Current guidelines represent an effort to assist clinicians in routine practice but have several limitations, particularly concerning long-term treatment. The ARIQUELI (efficacy and tolerability of the combination of lithium or aripiprazole in young bipolar non or partial responders to quetiapine monotherapy) study aims to evaluate two different augmentation strategies for quetiapine nonresponders or partial responders in acute and maintenance phases of BD treatment.

METHODS/DESIGN

The ARIQUELI study is a single-site, parallel-group, randomized, outcome assessor-blinded trial. BD I patients according to the DSM-IV-TR, in depressive, manic/hypomanic or mixed episode, aged 18 to 40 years, are eligible. After diagnostic assessments, patients initiated treatment in phase I with quetiapine. Nonresponders or partial responders after 8 weeks are allocated into one of two groups, potentiated with either lithium (0.5 to 0.8 mEq/l) or aripiprazole (10 or 15 mg). Patients will be followed up for 8 weeks in phase I (acute treatment), 6 months in phase II (continuation treatment) and 12 months in phase III (maintenance treatment). Outcome assessors are blinded to the treatment. The primary outcome is the evaluation of changes in mean scores on the CGI-BP-M between baseline and the endpoint at the end of each study phase.

DISCUSSION

The ARIQUELI study is currently in progress, with patients undergoing acute treatment (phase I), potentiation (phase II) and maintenance (phase III). The study will be extended until January 2015. Trials comparing lithium and aripiprazole with potentiate treatment in young BD I nonresponders to quetiapine in monotherapy can provide relevant information on the safety of these drugs in clinical practice. Long-term treatment is an issue of great importance and should be evaluated further through more in-depth studies given that BD is a chronic disease.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01710163.

Epigenetic dysregulation in schizophrenia: molecular and clinical aspects of histone deacetylase inhibitors

Notwithstanding the considerable advances in the treatment options for schizophrenia, the cognitive symptoms in particular are not receptive to antipsychotic treatment and considered one of the main predictors for poor social and functional outcome of the disease. Recent findings in preclinical model systems indicate that epigenetic modulation might emerge as a promising target for the treatment of cognitive disorders. The aim of this review is to introduce some of the principles of chromatin biology to the reader and to discuss a possible role in the neurobiology and pathophysiology of schizophrenia. We will discuss potential epigenetic targets for drug therapy, including histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi). In a second part, conceptual and practical challenges associated with clinical trials of chromatin-modifying drugs in psychiatric patient populations are discussed, including safety profiles, the potential for adverse effects and general issues revolving around pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. Additional investigations are required in order to fully evaluate the potential of HDACi and similar "epigenetic therapies" as novel treatment options for schizophrenia and other psychotic disease.

Drug treatment patterns in bipolar disorder: analysis of long-term self-reported data

Background

The objective of this study is to investigate drug treatment patterns in bipolar disorder using daily data from patients who received treatment as usual.

Methods

Patients self-reported the drugs taken daily for about 6 months. Daily drug use and drug combinations were determined for each patient, both by the specific drugs and by medication class. The drug load was calculated for all drugs taken within a medication class.

Results and discussion

Four hundred fifty patients returned a total of 99,895 days of data (mean 222.0 days). The most frequently taken drugs were mood stabilizers. Of the 450 patients, 353 (78.4%) took a stable drug combination for ≥50% of days. The majority of patients were taking polypharmacy, including 75% of those with a stable combination. Only a small number of drugs were commonly taken within each medication class, but there were a large number of unique drug combinations: 52 by medication class and 231 by specific drugs. Eighty percent of patients with a stable combination were taking three or less drugs daily. Patients without a stable combination took drugs but made frequent changes. Taking more than one drug within a medication class greatly increased the drug load.

To summarize, (1) patients were more likely to take a mood stabilizer than any other drug; (2) although most patients were taking polypharmacy, there were no predominant drug regimens even among those taking a stable combination; and (3) most patients with a stable combination take a relatively small number of drugs daily. The wide variation in drug regimens and numerous possible drug combinations suggest that more evidence is needed to optimize treatment of bipolar disorder.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2013

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments published guidelines for the management of bipolar disorder in 2005, with updates in 2007 and 2009. This third update, in conjunction with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders, reviews new evidence and is designed to be used in conjunction with the previous publications.The recommendations for the management of acute mania remain largely unchanged. Lithium, valproate, and several atypical antipsychotic agents continue to be first-line treatments for acute mania. Monotherapy with asenapine, paliperidone extended release (ER), and divalproex ER, as well as adjunctive asenapine, have been added as first-line options.For the management of bipolar depression, lithium, lamotrigine, and quetiapine monotherapy, as well as olanzapine plus selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), and lithium or divalproex plus SSRI/bupropion remain first-line options. Lurasidone monotherapy and the combination of lurasidone or lamotrigine plus lithium or divalproex have been added as a second-line options. Ziprasidone alone or as adjunctive therapy, and adjunctive levetiracetam have been added as not-recommended options for the treatment of bipolar depression. Lithium, lamotrigine, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, risperidone long-acting injection, and adjunctive ziprasidone continue to be first-line options for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. Asenapine alone or as adjunctive therapy have been added as third-line options.

Peripheral brain-derived neurotrophic factor changes along treatment with extended release quetiapine during acute mood episodes: an open-label trial in drug-free patients with bipolar disorder

Molecules that are involved in neuronal intercommunication and adaptability of neural networks, such as brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF), are targets of pathophysiological investigation in bipolar disorder (BD). Quetiapine is an attested treatment in this disorder, used in acute mood episodes. The aim of this study was to report prospective changes in serum BDNF levels in drug-free patients in acute mood episodes of BD who received treatment with extended-release quetiapine along a 16 week follow-up. Assessments were performed at baseline and weeks 2, 4, 8 and 16 with the Young Mania Rating Scale, the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale and the Clinical Global Impression severity scale. In these visits, serum BDNF levels were measured. Mixed effect models were used to investigate longitudinal changes. Twenty-five patients were included for this analysis, seventeen in a current depressive episode and eight in a manic/mixed episode. A significant improvement from baseline to endpoint was displayed. In the mixed model, significant main effects for episode and time appeared, and a time versus episode interaction showing increasing BDNF levels with time in those with a depressive episode, but a decrease in BDNF levels with time in those with a manic/mixed episode. BDNF may be a biomarker with differential response according to the polarity of mood episodes.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antimanic drugs in acute mania: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Conventional meta-analyses have shown inconsistent results for efficacy of pharmacological treatments for acute mania. We did a multiple-treatments meta-analysis, which accounted for both direct and indirect comparisons, to assess the effects of all antimanic drugs.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed 68 randomised controlled trials (16,073 participants) from Jan 1, 1980, to Nov 25, 2010, which compared any of the following pharmacological drugs at therapeutic dose range for the treatment of acute mania in adults: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, valproate, gabapentin, haloperidol, lamotrigine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, topiramate, and ziprasidone. The main outcomes were the mean change on mania rating scales and the number of patients who dropped out of the allocated treatment at 3 weeks. Analysis was done by intention to treat.

FINDINGS

Haloperidol (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0·56 [95% CI -0·69 to -0·43]), risperidone (-0·50 [-0·63 to -0·38), olanzapine (-0·43 [-0·54 to -0·32], lithium (-0·37 [-0·63 to -0·11]), quetiapine (-0·37 [-0·51 to -0·23]), aripiprazole (-0·37 [-0·51 to -0·23]), carbamazepine (-0·36 [-0·60 to -0·11], asenapine (-0·30 [-0·53 to -0·07]), valproate (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·04]), and ziprasidone (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·03]) were significantly more effective than placebo, whereas gabapentin, lamotrigine, and topiramate were not. Haloperidol had the highest number of significant differences and was significantly more effective than lithium (SMD -0·19 [95% CI -0·36 to -0·01]), quetiapine (-0·19 [-0·37 to 0·01]), aripiprazole (-0·19 [-0·36 to -0·02]), carbamazepine (-0·20 [-0·36 to -0·01]), asenapine (-0·26 [-0·52 to 0·01]), valproate (-0·36 [-0·56 to -0·15]), ziprasidone -0·36 [-0·56 to -0·15]), lamotrigine (-0·48 [-0·77 to -0·19]), topiramate (-0·63 [-0·84 to -0·43]), and gabapentin (-0·88 [-1·40 to -0·36]). Risperidone and olanzapine had a very similar profile of comparative efficacy, being more effective than valproate, ziprasidone, lamotrigine, topiramate, and gabapentin. Olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine led to significantly fewer discontinuations than did lithium, lamotrigine, placebo, topiramate, and gabapentin.

INTERPRETATION

Overall, antipsychotic drugs were significantly more effective than mood stabilisers. Risperidone, olanzapine, and haloperidol should be considered as among the best of the available options for the treatment of manic episodes. These results should be considered in the development of clinical practice guidelines.

FUNDING

None.

Pharmaceutical treatment of acute bipolar depression

The treatment of bipolar depression is one of the most challenging fields in contemporary psychiatry. The best data concern the antipsychotics quetiapine and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. However, the usefulness of antidepressants in bipolar depression remains controversial; positive data are available for fluoxetine but negative results have been published for paroxetine. Accumulated knowledge so far suggests that bipolar patients need continuous administration of an antimanic agent even during the acute depressive phase. Although our knowledge is indeed limited, the development of guidelines for polypharmacy is necessary and should be done as soon as possible.