Antipsychotic switching in bipolar disorders: a systematic review

Physical health in affective disorders: a narrative review of the literature

This article reviews the most common non-psychiatric comorbidities associated with affective disorders, examining the implications of their possible bidirectional link. A narrative review was conducted on the association among the three most common non-psychiatric diseases in major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder (obesity, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular diseases) in articles published from January 1994 to April 2020. The evidence suggests that obesity, metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular diseases are highly prevalent in patients diagnosed with affective disorders. The presence of non-psychiatric comorbidities significantly worsens the therapeutic management and prognosis of affective disorders and vice versa. In many cases, these comorbidities may precede the onset of affective disorders, although in most cases they appear after it. The presence of these concurrent non-psychiatric diseases in an individual diagnosed with an affective disorder is associated with a more complex disease presentation and management. For professionals, the evidence unequivocally supports routine surveillance of comorbidities from a multidisciplinary approach.

How to treat mania

OBJECTIVE

In this paper, we aimed at reviewing evidence-based treatment options for bipolar mania and proposed tentative evidence-based clinical suggestions regarding the management of a manic episode, especially regarding the choice of the proper mood stabilizer and antipsychotic medication.

METHOD

A narrative review was undertaken addressing 'treatment of bipolar mania'. Findings have been synthesized and incorporated with clinical experience into a model to support different treatment choices.

RESULTS

To date, there is solid evidence supporting the use of several medications, such as lithium, divalproex, and carbamazepine, and antipsychotics, such as chlorpromazine, haloperidol, risperidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, ziprasidone, aripiprazole, inhaled loxapine, asenapine, and cariprazine in acute mania, and some evidence supporting the use of clozapine or electroconvulsive therapy in treatment-refractory cases. However, in clinical practice, when making decisions about treatment, personalized treatment is needed, according to the different clinical presentations and more complex clinical situations within the manic episode and considering a long-term view and with the objective of not only a symptomatic but also functional recovery. After remission from acute mania, psychoeducation strategies are useful to ensure adherence.

DISCUSSION

Despite the evidence forefficacy of many currently available treatments for mania, the majority of RCTs provide little direction for the clinician as to what steps might be optimal in different presentations of mania as well as in the presence of specific patient characteristics. Manic episodes should be managed on a personalized basis considering the clinical course and patient criteria and with the expectation of maintaining that treatment in the long-term.

Asenapine prescribing patterns in the treatment of manic in- and outpatients: Results from the MANACOR study

Background:

Asenapine is the most recent compound that has been FDA- and EMA-approved for treatment of mania. Its efficacy and safety have been assessed in placebo-controlled trials, but little is known about its performance in routine clinical conditions. In this study, we compared features of patients treated with adjunctive asenapine or other adjunctive antipsychotics and the costs of the treatment.

Methods:

A combined prospective and retrospective data collection and analysis was conducted from January 2011 to December 2013 following a clinical interview and assessment of manic and depressive symptoms (YMRS, HDRS-17), clinical state (CGI-BP-M), psychosocial functioning (FAST), sexual dysfunction (PRSexDQ) and health resource costs associated with treatment with adjunctive asenapine versus other adjunctive antipsychotics.

Results:

Hundred and fifty-two patients from different university hospitals were included. Fifty-three patients received adjunctive asenapine and 99 received other adjunctive antipsychotics concomitantly to mood stabilizers. Considering inpatients, those treated with adjunctive asenapine presented a significantly less severe manic episode (P = 0.001), less psychotic symptoms (P = 0.030) and more comorbid personality disorder (P = 0.002). Regarding outpatients, those treated with adjunctive asenapine showed significantly less severe manic episode (P = 0.046), more previous mixed episodes (P = 0.013) and more sexual dysfunction at baseline (P = 0.036). No significant differences were found in mean total costs per day.

Conclusion:

Clinicians tended to use adjunctive asenapine in patients with less severe manic symptoms but more complex clinical profile, including more mixed episodes in the past, concomitant personality disorder, and sexual problems. Treatment with adjunctive asenapine was not associated with higher costs when compared to other options.

Association of antipsychotic treatment switching in patients with schizophrenia, bipolar, and major depressive disorders

Aims: To evaluate the association of relapse and healthcare resource utilization in patients with schizophrenia (SZ), bipolar disorder (BD), or major depressive disorder (MDD) who switched antipsychotic medication versus those who did not.Materials and methods: Medicaid claims from six US states spanning six years were retrospectively analyzed for antipsychotic switching versus non-switching. For all patients with SZ, BD, or MDD, and for the subset of patients who also had ≥1 extrapyramidal symptoms (EPS) diagnosis at baseline, times to the following outcomes were analyzed: underlying disease relapse, other psychiatric relapse, all-cause emergency room (ER) visit, all-cause inpatient (IP) admission, and EPS diagnosis.Results: Switchers (N = 10,548) had a shorter time to disease relapse, other psychiatric relapse, IP admissions, ER visits, and EPS diagnosis (all, log-rank p < .001) than non-switchers (N = 31,644). Switchers reached the median for IP admission (21.50 months) vs non-switchers (not reached) and for ER visits (switchers, 9.07 months; non-switchers, 13.35 months). For disease relapse, other psychiatric relapse, and EPS diagnosis, <50% of patients had an event during the two-year study period. Subgroup analysis of those with ≥1 EPS diagnosis revealed similar associations.Limitations: Only association, not causation, may be inferred, and there may be differences between the patient groups in parameters not evaluated.Conclusions: These results show that disease and other psychiatric relapse, all-cause ER visits, IP admissions, and EPS diagnosis occurred earlier for patients who switched antipsychotics than for those who did not, suggesting that switching is associated with an increased risk of relapse in patients with SZ, BD, and MDD. This may be attributed to more-severely ill patients being less responsive than those with less-severe illness, which, in turn, may require more episodes of switching.

Antipsychotic use in Northern Italian inter-episode bipolar disorder patients: considering both second- and first-generation agents

Evidence supports increasing antipsychotic use in bipolar disorder, especially second-generation antipsychotics. However, data regarding first-generation antipsychotic contemporary use are limited. We studied 380 Northern Italian bipolar disorder inter-episode patients, grouped according to current antipsychotic use, stratified by bipolar subtype (BDI vs. BDII). Furthermore, we compared first-generation antipsychotic users vs. non-users. In our sample (n = 357), 81.8% were taking antipsychotics (74% second-generation antipsychotics, 24.1% first-generation antipsychotics), with antipsychotic use in BDI significantly more prevalent than in BDII (85.2% vs. 72.0%). Overall, antipsychotic users vs. non-users had higher rates of hypo/manic last episode, lifetime psychiatric hospitalization, psychosis, and current psychotropic use, but lower rates of anxiety disorder main comorbidity and current antidepressant use. First-generation antipsychotic use rates (30.3% in BDI vs. 6.5% in BDII) were associated with more frequently being unpartnered, having elevated first/last episodes, higher lifetime hospitalization, involuntary commitment, psychosis, and psychosocial rehabilitation rates, and more current psychotropic use, but lower Global Assessment Functioning scores and less current antidepressant use. Bipolar disorder patients had robust antipsychotic (second-generation antipsychotic > first-generation antipsychotic) use, consistently with previous reports. FGAs were still prescribed for a substantial group of patients, likely suffering from severe bipolar disorder. Prescriptions need to be monitored to assess their appropriateness and adherence to evidence-based recommendations.

Expert advice on the management of valproate in women with bipolar disorder at childbearing age

INTRODUCTION

The perinatal period is associated with up to 2/3 relapses in untreated bipolar disorder (BD), with important consequences on the clinical BD outcome and on fetal and child development. Valproate (VPA), one of the most effective treatments in BD, is associated with the highest risk of serious neurodevelopmental disorders in exposed children. This has brought to tightened restrictions to its use by regulatory agencies and clinical guidelines.

METHODS

A panel of experts on the pharmacological treatment of BD conducted a non-systematic review of the scientific literature and clinical guidelines until March 2019, and provided specific evidence-based and experience-based clinical recommendations for VPA switching/discontinuation in BD women of childbearing potential.

RESULTS

After the review of the evidence in a face-to-face meeting, the panel concluded that several clinical criteria need to be considered to make a clinical decision about VPA discontinuation and switch. The plateau cross-taper switch may be preferred. Abrupt switching may bear augmented risk of relapse CONCLUSIONS: BD childbearing women treated with VPA must be managed on a personalized basis according to the clinical situation. It is mandatory to stop VPA during pregnancy. The duration of the discontinuation/switch process depends on different clinical variables. Lithium, lamotrigine, quetiapine, olanzapine or aripiprazole are good options for switch in stable BD patients in planned/unplanned pregnancy. In unstable BD patients planning pregnancy, stability is paramount. Prevention of post-partum episodes requires reinstatement of effective treatment before or after birth (in the case of VPA). VPA is still an option in the post-partum period and beyond.

Hospitalization risk in bipolar disorder patients treated with lurasidone versus other atypical antipsychotics

OBJECTIVE

This observational study compared the risk of hospitalization for patients with bipolar disorder when treated with lurasidone versus other oral atypical antipsychotics.

METHODS

This US commercial claims analysis (4 April 2010 through 24 September 2014) used the Optum Research Database to identify adult patients with bipolar disorder treated with oral atypical antipsychotics (N = 11,132). The first claim for an atypical antipsychotic defined the index date, with pre-index and post-index periods of 180 and 360 days, respectively. Every month of the post-index period was categorized as monotherapy treatment with lurasidone, aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, ziprasidone, no/minimal treatment or other. Starting with the initial month of treatment, the risk of psychiatric or all-cause hospitalization in the subsequent month was examined based on treatment in the current month and pre-index covariates (age, gender, hospitalizations, emergency room visits, diagnoses for anxiety, alcohol abuse, substance abuse, hypertension, type 2 diabetes and obesity) and time-varying versions of the pre-index covariates using a marginal structural model.

RESULTS

After controlling for covariates, relative to lurasidone, the odds of psychiatric and all-cause hospitalization, respectively, were 2-3 times higher for olanzapine (odds ratio [OR] = 2.78, CI 1.09, 7.08, p = .032; OR = 3.20, CI 1.24, 8.26, p = .016), quetiapine (OR = 2.80, CI 1.13, 6.95, p = .026; OR = 3.23, CI 1.29, 8.11, p = .013), risperidone (OR = 2.50, CI 1.01, 6.21, p = .048; OR = 2.79, CI 1.11, 7.02, p = .029), aripiprazole (OR = 2.13, CI 0.87, 5.20, p = .097; OR = 2.57, CI 1.04, 6.37, p = .041) and ziprasidone (OR =2.31, CI 0.91, 5.85, p = .079; OR = 2.49, CI 0.97, 6.40, p = .058).

CONCLUSIONS

In this claims database analysis, lurasidone-treated patients with bipolar disorder had a significantly lower risk of psychiatric hospitalization compared to quetiapine, olanzapine and risperidone, but not aripiprazole or ziprasidone. Lurasidone-treated patients had a significantly lower risk of all-cause hospitalization compared to quetiapine, olanzapine, risperidone and aripiprazole, but not ziprasidone.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

Initial symptom severity of bipolar I disorder and the efficacy of olanzapine: a meta-analysis of individual participant data from five placebo-controlled studies

BACKGROUND

The efficacy of antipsychotics across the initial severity range in patients with acute mania remains unclear. Therefore, we examined the influence of baseline severity on the efficacy of olanzapine.

METHODS

We did an individual participant data meta-analysis of double-blind, randomised controlled trials that compared olanzapine with placebo, identified through searches of the ClinicalStudyRequest.com database on Feb 2, 2016. We included patients with acute mania associated with bipolar I disorder. We examined the association between baseline and change scores on the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS; range 0-60) up to 3 weeks for olanzapine versus placebo groups using eight increasingly complex competing mixed-effects models for repeated measures.

FINDINGS

We identified 33 reports, five (15%) of which were eligible and contained data for 939 patients (552 received olanzapine; 387 received placebo). The interaction between baseline severity and treatment was significant (β=0·22, 95% CI 0·05-0·39; p=0·013). The greater the baseline severity, the greater the magnitude of the differences between olanzapine and placebo was expected. The mean estimated YMRS scores were reduced at 3 weeks in both groups, but were greater with olazapine than placebo by 2·56 points for patients with a baseline score of 20-25 (9·26 for olanzapine vs 6·70 for placebo; effect size 0·35, 95% CI 0·11-0·60), by 4·74 points for a baseline score of 25-35 (14·25 vs 9·51; 0·58, 0·34-0·86), and by 8·01 points for a baseline score of 35-60 (21·72 vs 13·71; 0·70, 0·31-1·23).

INTERPRETATION

Benefits of olanzapine can be expected for patients across the full spectrum of symptom severity who are likely to be treated for acute mania. Less severely ill patients seem to benefit less in terms of olanzapine efficacy, but still experience the same side-effects as more severely ill patients. Thus, clinicians and patients should carefully consider the benefit-to-risk ratio of olanzapine and its additional, prophylactic effect against relapse in the long term. The generalisability of these results to other antipsychotics, trial designs, and medical conditions remains to be established.

FUNDING

None.

Multidisciplinary consensus on the therapeutic recommendations for iatrogenic hyperprolactinemia secondary to antipsychotics

Hyperprolactinemia is an underappreciated/unknown adverse effects of antipsychotics. The consequences of hyperprolactinemia compromise therapeutic adherence and can be serious. We present the consensus recommendations made by a group of experts regarding the management of antipsychotic-induced hyperprolactinemia. The current consensus was developed in 3 phases: 1, review of the scientific literature; 2, subsequent round table discussion to attempt to reach a consensus among the experts; and 3, review by all of the authors of the final conclusions until reaching a complete consensus. We include recommendations on the appropriate time to act after hyperprolactinemia detection and discuss the evidence on available options: decreasing the dose of the antipsychotic drug, switching antipsychotics, adding aripiprazole, adding dopaminergic agonists, and other type of treatment. The consensus also included recommendations for some specific populations such as patients with a first psychotic episode and the pediatric-youth population, bipolar disorder, personality disorders and the elderly population.

The International College of Neuropsychopharmacology (CINP) Treatment Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder in Adults (CINP-BD-2017), Part 1: Background and Methods of the Development of Guidelines

BACKGROUND

This paper includes a short description of the important clinical aspects of Bipolar Disorder with emphasis on issues that are important for the therapeutic considerations, including mixed and psychotic features, predominant polarity, and rapid cycling as well as comorbidity.

METHODS

The workgroup performed a review and critical analysis of the literature concerning grading methods and methods for the development of guidelines.

RESULTS

The workgroup arrived at a consensus to base the development of the guideline on randomized controlled trials and related meta-analyses alone in order to follow a strict evidence-based approach. A critical analysis of the existing methods for the grading of treatment options was followed by the development of a new grading method to arrive at efficacy and recommendation levels after the analysis of 32 distinct scenarios of available data for a given treatment option.

CONCLUSION

The current paper reports details on the design, method, and process for the development of CINP guidelines for the treatment of Bipolar Disorder. The rationale and the method with which all data and opinions are combined in order to produce an evidence-based operationalized but also user-friendly guideline and a specific algorithm are described in detail in this paper.

High cognitive reserve in bipolar disorders as a moderator of neurocognitive impairment

BACKGROUND

Cognitive reserve (CR) reflects the capacity of the brain to endure neuropathology, minimize clinical manifestations and successfully complete cognitive tasks. The present study aims to determine whether high CR may constitute a moderator of cognitive functioning in bipolar disorder (BD).

METHODS

102 patients with BD and 32 healthy controls were enrolled. All patients met DSM-IV criteria for I or II BD and were euthymic (YMRS≤6 and HDRS≤8) during a 6-month period. All participants were tested with a comprehensive neuropsychological battery, and a Cerebral Reserve Score (CRS) was estimated. Subjects with a CRS below the group median were classified as having low CR, whereas participants with a CRS above the median value were considered to have high CR.

RESULTS

Participants with BD with high CR displayed a better performance in measures of attention (digits forward: F=4.554, p=0.039); phonemic and semantic verbal fluency (FAS: F=9.328, p=0.004; and Animal Naming: F=8.532, p=0.006); and verbal memory (short cued recall of California Verbal Learning Test: F=4.236, p=0.046), after multivariable adjustment for potential confounders, including number of admissions and prior psychotic symptoms.

LIMITATIONS

The cross-sectional design of the study does not allow the establishment of causal inferences. Additionally, the small size of the sample may have limited some results.

CONCLUSIONS

High cognitive reserve may therefore be a valuable construct to explore for predicting neurocognitive performance in patients with BD regarding premorbid status.

Neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity caused by combined use of lithium and risperidone: a case report and literature review

BACKGROUND

Combination lithium, a mood stabilizer, and risperidone, an atypical antipsychotic drug, is widely used for treatment of psychotic disorders. Rare reports concern severe adverse drug reaction in multiple organic systems with their combined use. We report two episodes of neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity in a patient following the combined use of lithium and risperidone.

CASE PRESENTATION

A 55-year-old male had a diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder at the age of 51. He was initially treated with a combination of lithium and olanzapine 5 to 15 mg/day for 2 years. He was admitted to psychiatric ward at the age of 53 due to manic episode with psychotic feature. Because of poor blood sugar control, we switched olanzapine 20 mg/day to risperidone 4.5 mg/day with combination of lithium 900mg/day. The patient presented neurotoxicity, neuroleptic-malignant-syndrome like symptoms, and nephrotoxicity, elevation of blood creatinine and decreased urine output few days later. These signs were fully recovered within 2 days after we discontinued all medications and gave normal saline hydration. Then we re-administered decreased dosage of lithium 600 mg/day and risperidone 3 mg/day, and the similar episode occurred again 3 days later. All drugs were discontinued again, then his delirium resolved and abnormal data returned to normal 1 day later. Finally, the patient was treated with risperidone 2 mg/day as monotherapy, and no episode of neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity appeared in the following 2 years.

CONCLUSIONS

The case exemplifies neurotoxicity and nephrotoxicity after combined use of lithium and risperidone. These adverse effects resolved soon after discontinuing these medications and adequate hydration. Clinicians should be cautious about neurological and renal adverse effects.

Antipsychotic switching in schizoaffective disorder: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To systematically review the evidence about the switching of antipsychotics in SZA in acute and maintenance treatment.

METHODS

A systematic review following the PRISMA statement identifying studies specifically conducted on, or including, SZA patients.

RESULTS

One analysis considered uniquely a SZA population, 13 more studies including an adequate SZA subsample were considered. Most of the studies were aimed at switching antipsychotic treatments to improve tolerability issues. Despite the absolute lack of trials specifically conducted on SZA populations, we found limited evidence on the use of aripiprazole, lurasidone, and, to a lesser extent, risperidone and ziprasidone as possible agents to substitute previous treatments whereas efficacy or, more frequently, tolerability issues arise. Evidence supports also the switch to risperidone long-acting injectable when the adherence to oral treatment may be a concern.

CONCLUSIONS

Antipsychotic switching in SZA is a neglected topic that would need better profiling. Clinicians should keep in mind the receptor binding characteristics of drugs in order to optimize transitions. Evidence supports the switch to aripiprazole and lurasidone, less strongly to risperidone and ziprasidone. The switch to risperidone long-acting injectable is supported, especially in patients with limited treatment adherence to oral therapy.

Bipolar disorder

Bipolar disorder is a recurrent chronic disorder characterised by fluctuations in mood state and energy. It affects more than 1% of the world's population irrespective of nationality, ethnic origin, or socioeconomic status. Bipolar disorder is one of the main causes of disability among young people, leading to cognitive and functional impairment and raised mortality, particularly death by suicide. A high prevalence of psychiatric and medical comorbidities is typical in affected individuals. Accurate diagnosis of bipolar disorder is difficult in clinical practice because onset is most commonly a depressive episode and looks similar to unipolar depression. Moreover, there are currently no valid biomarkers for the disorder. Therefore, the role of clinical assessment remains key. Detection of hypomanic periods and longitudinal assessment are crucial to differentiate bipolar disorder from other conditions. Current knowledge of the evolving pharmacological and psychological strategies in bipolar disorder is of utmost importance.

Asenapine for the Acute Treatment of Pediatric Manic or Mixed Episode of Bipolar I Disorder

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate asenapine versus placebo in 403 patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder currently in manic or mixed episodes.

METHOD

In this double-blind, placebo-controlled, international trial, patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to placebo, asenapine 2.5, 5, or 10 mg b.i.d. (twice daily). Primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score at day 21. Analyses of patients with/without attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and with/without stimulant use were performed.

RESULTS

The mean difference in asenapine versus placebo in YMRS was -3.2 (p = .0008), -5.3 (p < .001), and -6.2 (p < .001) for asenapine 2.5, 5, and 10 mg b.i.d., respectively. Treatment-emergent adverse events with an incidence ≥5% and at least twice placebo were somnolence, sedation, hypoesthesia oral, paresthesia oral, and increased appetite. The asenapine groups had a higher incidence of ≥7% weight gain (range, 8.0%-12.0%) versus placebo (1.1%; p < .05). The mean change from baseline in fasting insulin was larger for patients treated with asenapine than those with placebo (asenapine 2.5 mg b.i.d.: 73.375 pmol/L; asenapine 5 mg b.i.d.: 114.042 pmol/L; asenapine 10 mg b.i.d.: 59.846 pmol/L; placebo: 3.690 pmol/L). The mean changes from baseline for lipid parameters and glucose were also larger in asenapine groups than in the placebo group. No safety differences were observed with respect to ADHD and stimulant use.

CONCLUSION

All asenapine doses versus placebo were superior based on change in YMRS at day 21. Asenapine was generally well tolerated in patients aged 10 to 17 years with bipolar I disorder in manic or mixed states. Increases in weight and fasting insulin were associated with asenapine. Clinical trial registration information-Efficacy and Safety of Asenapine Treatment for Pediatric Bipolar Disorder; http://clinicaltrials.gov; NCT01244815.

Hyperprolactinemia and medications for bipolar disorder: systematic review of a neglected issue in clinical practice

Drug-induced changes in serum prolactin (sPrl) levels constitute a relevant issue due to the potentially severe consequences on physical health of psychiatric patients such as sexual dysfunctions, osteoporosis and Prl-sensitive tumors. Several drugs have been associated to sPrl changes. Only antipsychotics have been extensively studied as sPrl-elevating agents in schizophrenia, but the extent to which bipolar disorder (BD) treatments affect sPrl levels is much less known. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence of the effects of drugs used in BD on Prl. This review followed the PRISMA statement. The MEDLINE/PubMed/Index Medicus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for articles in English appearing from any time to May 30, 2014. Twenty-six studies were included. These suggest that treatments for BD are less likely to be associated with Prl elevations, with valproate, quetiapine, lurasidone, mirtazapine, and bupropion reported not to change PRL levels significantly and lithium and aripiprazole to lower them in some studies. Taking into account the effects of the different classes of drugs on Prl may improve the care of BD patients requiring long-term pharmacotherapy. Based on the results of this review, lithium and valproate appear to be safer due to their low potential to elevate sPrL; among antipsychotics, quetiapine, lurasidone and aripiprazole appear to be similarly safe.

The characteristics and health needs of pregnant women with schizophrenia compared with bipolar disorder and affective psychoses

BACKGROUND

Most women with psychotic disorders and bipolar disorders have children but their pregnancies are at risk of adverse psychiatric and fetal outcome. The extent of modifiable risk factors - both clinical and socio-demographic - is unclear as most studies have used administrative data or recruited from specialist tertiary referral clinics. We therefore aimed to investigate the socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of an epidemiologically representative cohort of pregnant women with affective and non-affective severe mental illness.

METHODS

Women with severe mental illness were identified from a large electronic mental health case register in south London, and a data linkage with national maternity Hospital Episode Statistics identified pregnancies in 2007-2011. Data were extracted using structured fields, text searching and natural language processing applications.

RESULTS

Of 456 pregnant women identified, 236 (51.7%) had schizophrenia and related disorders, 220 (48.3%) had affective psychosis or bipolar disorder. Women with schizophrenia and related disorders were younger, less likely to have a partner in pregnancy, more likely to be black, to smoke or misuse substances and had significantly more time in the two years before pregnancy in acute care (inpatient or intensive home treatment) compared with women with affective disorders. Both groups had high levels of domestic abuse in pregnancy (recorded in 18.9%), were from relatively deprived backgrounds and had impaired functioning measured by the Health of the Nation Outcome Scale. Women in the affective group were more likely to stop medication in the first trimester (39% versus 25%) whereas women with non-affective psychoses were more likely to switch medication.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant proportion of women, particularly those with non-affective psychoses, have modifiable risk factors requiring tailored care to optimize pregnancy outcomes. Mental health professionals need to be mindful of the possibility of pregnancy in women of childbearing age and prescribe and address modifiable risk factors accordingly.

Pharmacotherapy of acute mania: monotherapy or combination therapy with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics?

The use of combination therapy with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics in acute mania in bipolar disorder (BD) is widespread, although most treatment guidelines recommend monotherapy as the first option, and reserve combination therapy, which is associated with more frequent and more severe side effects, for when patients do not respond to the former treatment option. Reasons to prescribe combination therapy include the lack of efficacy of the current treatment (either real or due to undisclosed poor adherence), psychiatric comorbidities, severe previous course of illness, slow cross-tapering during treatment switching, and potential benefits from particular combinations. The decision to start with monotherapy or combination therapy may depend on the patient characteristics, and is still under debate. Clinical trials designed to ascertain whether combination therapy or monotherapy is more advantageous for patients in acute mania and beyond, according to illness severity, are urgently needed. Adding a third monotherapy arm to the conventional two-arm, adjunctive-design trials or initiating combination therapy from the beginning may help to shed some light on the issue.

A network meta-analysis on comparative efficacy and all-cause discontinuation of antimanic treatments in acute bipolar mania

BACKGROUND

Evidence synthesis methods enabling direct and indirect comparisons over the entire set of relevant clinical data produce quantitative point estimates for the treatments contrasts between competing interventions, and provide a hierarchical rank ordering between them. We aimed to provide evidence-based guidance on the efficacy and all-cause discontinuation of antimanic treatments.

METHOD

We conducted a network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. We searched all standard literature databases without language restrictions up to 15 January 2014 to identify reports of short-term, randomized, blinded trials of putative antimanic drugs as monotherapy for adults with bipolar-I mania.

RESULTS

Altogether, 14256 manic patients randomized to one of 18 active treatments or placebo provided 95 direct comparisons on 128 data points. For the primary outcome, standardized mean difference as Hedges' g (standardized mean difference; SMD), the hierarchies indicated by surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities were in agreement with the point estimates for all antimanic drugs identified as effective. For the 12 effective antimanic drugs on clinical use, SMDs against placebo ranged from 0.32 to 0.66 without superiority of one over another, except for risperidone v. aripiprazole and valproate. Aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, and valproate had less all-cause discontinuation rates than placebo. Sensitivity analysis by drug class indicated similar efficacy profiles for haloperidol, second-generation antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers.

CONCLUSIONS

Hierarchical rank ordering by comparative efficacy and risk of all-cause discontinuations should help to guide antimanic treatment choices by clinicians, healthcare policy makers, and guideline developers.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics, safety and clinical efficacy of ziprasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Multiple strategies exist for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders. In the last 20 years, several 'new' compounds have been introduced, called 'atypical antipsychotics', which have higher efficacy and better tolerability than first-generation neuroleptics. Among them, ziprasidone (ZPR) is currently finding widespread use, and it has also been shown to be active as an augmenter in bipolar disorder therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide the latest information on ZPR, an 'atypical' agent for the pharmacological therapy of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. A literature search has been carried out with the keywords 'ziprasidone', 'schizophrenia', 'psychosis', 'bipolar', 'pharmacokinetics' and 'clinical trials'. In this process, particular attention has been paid to the drug pharmacokinetic characteristics and its safety in clinical use.

EXPERT OPINION

ZPR shares most advantages and disadvantages with other atypical antipsychotics. However, it can be useful for its low tendency to cause metabolic syndrome and hyperprolactinaemia, especially in patients suffering from excess weight, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes or who have suffered from hyperprolactinaemia when using other antipsychotics. However, there are serious doubts as to whether ZPR should be administered to patients suffering from arrhythmias or QTc prolongation, and even more for administration to bipolar patients undergoing polypharmacy with antidepressants.