Efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy in bipolar I and II depression: a double-blind, placebo-controlled study (the BOLDER II study)

Progress and trends of research on mineral elements for depression

Objective

To explore the research progress and trends on mineral elements and depression.

Methods

After querying the MeSH database and referring to the search rules, the search terms were selected and optimized to obtain the target literature collection. We analyzed the general characteristics of the literature, conducted network clustering and co-occurrence analysis, and carried out a narrative review of crucial literature.

Results

Bipolar disorder was a dominant topic in the retrieved literature, which saw a significant increase in 2010 and 2019-2020. Most studies focused on mineral elements, including lithium, calcium, magnesium, zinc, and copper. The majority of journals and disciplines were in the fields of psychiatry, neuropsychology, neuropharmacology, nutrition, medical informatics, chemistry, and public health. The United States had the highest proportion in terms of paper sources, most-cited articles, high-frequency citations, frontier citations, and high centrality citation. Regarding the influence of academic institutions, the top five were King's College London, the Chinese Academy of Sciences, University of Barcelona, INSERM, and Heidelberg University. Frontier keywords included bipolar disorder, drinking water, (neuro)inflammation, gut microbiota, and systematic analysis. Research on lithium response, magnesium supplementation, and treatment-resistant unipolar depression increased significantly after 2013.

Conclusion

Global adverse events may have indirectly driven the progress in related research. Although the literature from the United States represents an absolute majority, its influence on academic institutions is relatively weaker. Multiple pieces of evidence support the efficacy of lithium in treating bipolar disorder (BD). A series of key discoveries have led to a paradigm shift in research, leading to increasingly detailed studies on the role of magnesium, calcium, zinc, and copper in the treatment of depression. Most studies on mineral elements remain diverse and inconclusive. The potential toxicity and side effects of some elements warrant careful attention.

Phenotypic clustering of bipolar disorder supports stratification by lithium responsiveness over diagnostic subtypes

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to determine whether the clinical profiles of bipolar disorder (BD) patients could be differentiated more clearly using the existing classification by diagnostic subtype or by lithium treatment responsiveness.

METHODS

We included adult patients with BD-I or II (N = 477 across four sites) who were treated with lithium as their principal mood stabilizer for at least 1 year. Treatment responsiveness was defined using the dichotomized Alda score. We performed hierarchical clustering on phenotypes defined by 40 features, covering demographics, clinical course, family history, suicide behaviour, and comorbid conditions. We then measured the amount of information that inferred clusters carried about (A) BD subtype and (B) lithium responsiveness using adjusted mutual information (AMI) scores. Detailed phenotypic profiles across clusters were then evaluated with univariate comparisons.

RESULTS

Two clusters were identified (n = 56 and n = 421), which captured significantly more information about lithium responsiveness (AMI range: 0.033 to 0.133) than BD subtype (AMI: 0.004 to 0.011). The smaller cluster had disproportionately more lithium responders (n = 47 [83.8%]) when compared to the larger cluster (103 [24.4%]; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

Phenotypes derived from detailed clinical data may carry more information about lithium responsiveness than the current classification of diagnostic subtype. These findings support lithium responsiveness as a valid approach to stratification in clinical samples.

Efficacy and tolerability of FDA-approved atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

We employed a Bayesian network meta-analysis for comparison of the efficacy and tolerability of US Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for the treatment of bipolar patients with depressive episodes. Sixteen randomized controlled trials with 7234 patients treated by one of the five AAPs (cariprazine, lumateperone, lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine) were included. For the response rate (defined as an improvement of ≥50% from baseline on the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS]), all AAPs were more efficacious than placebo. For the remission rate (defined as the endpoint of MADRS ≤12 or ≤ 10), cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine, and quetiapine had higher remission rates than placebo. In terms of tolerability, olanzapine was unexpectedly associated with lower odds of all-cause discontinuation in comparison with placebo, whereas quetiapine was associated with higher odds of discontinuation due to adverse events than placebo. Compared with placebo, lumateperone, olanzapine, and quetiapine showed higher odds of somnolence. Lumateperone had a lower rate of ≥ weight gain of 7% than placebo and other treatments. Olanzapine was associated with a significant increase from baseline in total cholesterol and triglycerides than placebo. These findings inform individualized prescriptions of AAPs for treating bipolar depression in clinical practice.

Efficacy of cariprazine in patients with bipolar depression and higher or lower levels of baseline anxiety: a pooled post hoc analysis

Post hoc analyses evaluated cariprazine, a dopamine D 3 -preferring D 3 /D 2 receptor partial agonist, in patients with bipolar I depression and high baseline anxiety. Data were pooled from two phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies in adults with bipolar I disorder and a major depressive episode (NCT02670538, NCT02670551). Cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d were evaluated in patient subgroups with higher and lower baseline anxiety. In patients with higher baseline anxiety, significant differences for cariprazine 1.5 mg/d versus placebo were observed on change in Montgomery-Åsberg Rating Scale (MADRS) total score, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A) total score and subscale scores, and rates of MADRS remission ( P < 0.05 all); nonsignificant numerical improvements were observed for cariprazine 3 mg/d versus placebo. In patients with lower anxiety, differences versus placebo were significant for HAM-A (cariprazine 3 mg/d) and MADRS (cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/d) total score changes ( P < 0.05 all). Rates of treatment-emergent mania were low and similar for cariprazine and placebo. Cariprazine 1.5 mg/d had consistent effects on anxiety and depression symptoms in patients with bipolar I depression and higher baseline anxiety; tolerability was favorable. Given few proven treatments for this common comorbidity, these preliminary results are promising.

Treatment and Management of Mental Health Conditions During Pregnancy and Postpartum: ACOG Clinical Practice Guideline No. 5

PURPOSE

To assess the evidence regarding safety and efficacy of psychiatric medications to treat mental health conditions during pregnancy and lactation. The conditions reviewed include depression, anxiety and anxiety-related disorders, bipolar disorder, and acute psychosis. For information on screening and diagnosis, refer to American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) Clinical Practice Guideline Number 4, "Screening and Diagnosis of Mental Health Conditions During Pregnancy and Postpartum" (1).

TARGET POPULATION

Pregnant or postpartum individuals with mental health conditions with onset that may have predated the perinatal period or may have occurred for the first time in pregnancy or the first year postpartum or may have been exacerbated in that time.

METHODS

This guideline was developed using an a priori protocol in conjunction with a writing team consisting of one specialist in obstetrics and gynecology and one maternal-fetal medicine subspecialist appointed by the ACOG Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines-Obstetrics and two external subject matter experts. ACOG medical librarians completed a comprehensive literature search for primary literature within Cochrane Library, Cochrane Collaboration Registry of Controlled Trials, EMBASE, PubMed, and MEDLINE. Studies that moved forward to the full-text screening stage were assessed by two authors from the writing team based on standardized inclusion and exclusion criteria. Included studies underwent quality assessment, and a modified GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) evidence-to-decision framework was applied to interpret and translate the evidence into recommendation statements.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This Clinical Practice Guideline includes recommendations on treatment and management of perinatal mental health conditions including depression, anxiety, bipolar disorders, and acute postpartum psychosis, with a focus on psychopharmacotherapy. Recommendations are classified by strength and evidence quality. Ungraded Good Practice Points are included to provide guidance when a formal recommendation could not be made because of inadequate or nonexistent evidence.

The efficacy and safety of lurasidone in bipolar I depression with and without rapid cycling: A pooled post-hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of lurasidone monotherapy in patients with bipolar I depression with or without rapid cycling has not been previously investigated.

METHODS

We performed subgroup analysis (rapid cycling/non-rapid cycling) of pooled data from two 6-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trials of lurasidone monotherapy (20-60 mg/day or 80-120 mg/day). Analyses included mean change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Safety assessments included the number of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) and laboratory assessments.

RESULTS

Of 1024 patients randomized, 85 were rapid cycling. Mean change in MADRS total score in patients with non-rapid cycling and rapid cycling, respectively, was -14.8 (effect size = 0.47) and - 12.8 (effect size = 0.04) in the lurasidone 20-60 mg/day group, -14.3 (effect size = 0.41) and - 13.0 (effect size = 0.02) in the lurasidone 80-120 mg/day group and -10.6 and -13.3 in the placebo group. The most common TEAE in each subgroup was akathisia in both lurasidone groups. Treatment-emergent mania was reported only in a small number of rapid cycling and non-rapid cycling patients.

LIMITATIONS

This was a post-hoc analysis of a short-term study that excluded patients with ≥8 cycles in the past year.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with non-rapid cycling bipolar depression, lurasidone monotherapy significantly improved depressive symptoms relative to placebo at both the 20-60 mg/day and 80-120 mg/day doses. In patients with rapid cycling, both doses of lurasidone displayed depressive symptom score reduction from baseline, but significant improvement was not observed likely due to high levels of improvement on placebo and small sample size.

Antidepressive Effectiveness of Amisulpride, Aripiprazole, and Olanzapine in Patients With Schizophrenia Spectrum Disorders: A Secondary Outcome Analysis of a Pragmatic, Randomized Trial (BeSt InTro)

BACKGROUND

Depressive symptoms are frequent in schizophrenia and associated with a poorer outcome. Currently, the optimal treatment for depressive symptoms in schizophrenia remains undetermined. Amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine all have antidepressive pharmacodynamic properties, ranging from serotonergic affinities to limbic dopaminergic selectivity. Consequently, in a 12-month pragmatic, randomized clinical trial, we aimed to investigate differences in antidepressive effectiveness among amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine as a secondary outcome, measured by change in the Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score in patients within the schizophrenia spectrum.

METHODS

Psychotic patients within the schizophrenia spectrum were included, and effectiveness was analyzed with latent growth curve modeling.

RESULTS

Of the 144 patients, 51 (35%) were women, the mean age was 31.7 (SD 12.7), and 39% were antipsychotic naive. At inclusion, 68 (47%) participants had a Calgary Depression Scale for Schizophrenia sum score >6, indicating severe depressive symptoms. Across the 12-month follow-up, there was a depressive symptom reduction in all medication groups, but no statistically significant differences between the study drugs. Separate analyses of the subcohort with elevated depressive symptoms at inclusion also failed to find differences in depressive symptom reduction between study drugs. The reduction in depressive symptoms mainly occurred within 6 weeks after randomization.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a reduction in depressive symptoms under treatment with amisulpride, aripiprazole, and olanzapine in acutely psychotic patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder, but no differences between the drugs.

Atypical antipsychotic-induced mania: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The possibility of atypical antipsychotics (AA) to induce manic symptoms has been raised by several articles. The objective of this study was to describe whether exposure to AA may induce mania in mood disorders.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review following the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis guidelines. The systematic search encompassed all relevant studies published until April 4th, 2022. A meta-analysis testing whether treatment emergent mania (TEM) is more frequent with the use of AA compared with placebo was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 52 studies were included in the systematic review. We found 24 case reports or case series describing 40 manic/hypomanic episodes allegedly induced by AA. Twenty-one placebo-controlled trials were included in a meta-analysis including 4823 individuals treated with AA and 3252 individuals receiving placebo. Our meta-analysis showed that the use of AA protects against the development of TEM (OR: 0.68 [95 % CI: 0.52-0.89], p = 0.005).

LIMITATIONS

AA-induced mania/hypomania was not the primary outcome in any of the observational or interventional studies. TEM was not homogeneously defined across studies. In most case reports it was not possible to establish causality between the use of AA and the development of manic symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

TEM is more frequent with placebo than with AA, which suggests that AA exposure does not represent a relevant risk for TEM. Mania/hypomania induced by an AA seems to be rare events, since anecdotal evidence from case reports and case series were not observed in observational prospective and interventional studies.

All studies are not created equal: A systematic narrative review of bipolar depression clinical trial inclusion/exclusion rules and baseline severity scores

BACKGROUND

Several bipolar depression treatment guidelines have been designed to assist clinicians with medication selection. When ranking medications, none explicitly considered the inclusion/exclusion criteria or baseline severity scores of the reviewed clinical trials. This article aimed to determine if sufficient differences exist in these variables to justify their consideration when designing treatment guidelines.

METHODS

Using Ovid and PubMed databases in May and September 2022, all published, short-term cross-over or parallel-group design studies comparing second generation antipsychotics (SGAs), mood stabilizers, or antidepressants versus placebo in bipolar depressed patients were identified. Included studies must have enrolled adult bipolar I/II depressed patients, randomized patients into two or more treatment groups, utilized a double-blind, prospective design written in English, and had primary outcome results that were statistically significant in favor of the investigational treatment.

RESULTS

Thirty studies met eligibility criteria, comprising a total of 8791 patients. Among those studies, there were seventeen antipsychotic trials, six lithium trials, one lamotrigine trial, three valproate trials, two carbamazepine trials, and two antidepressant trials. The analysis revealed substantial differences among the studies. Although this was seen among all the different drug classes, these differences are clearest when comparing the lithium trials to those of the SGAs.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations included the selection of severity scores from the treatment arm with the most severe score and the exclusive focus on mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and SGAs.

CONCLUSIONS

Severity of the enrolled patient sample and treatment-resistance should be considered in addition to other factors when ranking medications in bipolar depression treatment guidelines.

Efficacy and safety profiles of mood stabilizers and antipsychotics for bipolar depression: a systematic review

The whole picture of psychotropics for bipolar depression (BPD) remains unclear. This review compares the differences in efficacy and safety profiles among common psychotropics for BPD. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO were searched for proper studies. The changes in the depressive rating scale, remission/response rates, nervous system adverse events (NSAEs), gastrointestinal adverse events (GIAEs), metabolic parameters, and prolactin were compared between medication and placebo or among medications with the Cohen's d or number needed to treat/harm. The search provided 10 psychotropics for comparison. Atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) were superior to lithium and lamotrigine at alleviating acute depressive symptoms. Lithium was more likely to induce dry mouth and nausea. Cariprazine and aripiprazole seemed to be associated with an increased risk of akathisia and upper GIAEs. Lurasidone was associated with an increased risk of developing akathisia and hyperprolactinemia. Olanzapine, olanzapine-fluoxetine combination (OFC), and quetiapine were associated with an increased risk of NSAEs, metabolic risk, dry mouth, and constipation. Cariprazine, lurasidone, OFC, or quetiapine was optimal monotherapy for BPD. Further studies are needed to assess the efficacy and safety of lamotrigine for treating BPD. Adverse events varied widely across different drug types due to variations in psychopharmacological mechanisms, dosages, titration, and ethnicities.

Genetics of bipolar disorder: insights into its complex architecture and biology from common and rare variants

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a common mental disorder characterized by recurrent mood episodes, which causes major socioeconomic burdens globally. Though its disease pathogenesis is largely unknown, the high heritability of BD indicates strong contributions from genetic factors. In this review, we summarize the recent achievements in the genetics of BD, particularly those from genome-wide association study (GWAS) of common variants and next-generation sequencing analysis of rare variants. These include the identification of dozens of robust disease-associated loci, deepening of our understanding of the biology of BD, objective description of correlations with other psychiatric disorders and behavioral traits, formulation of methods for predicting disease risk and drug response, and the discovery of a single gene associated with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia spectrum with a large effect size. On the other hand, the findings to date have not yet made a clear contribution to the improvement of clinical psychiatry of BD. We overview the remaining challenges as well as possible paths to resolve them, referring to studies of other major neuropsychiatric disorders.

The efficacy of lumateperone on symptoms of depression in bipolar I and bipolar II disorder: Secondary and post hoc analyses

A recent Phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study established that lumateperone 42-mg monotherapy significantly improved symptoms of depression in patients with bipolar depression. This manuscript reports prespecified secondary and post hoc efficacy analyses. Patients with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder experiencing a major depressive episode were randomized 1:1 to lumateperone 42 mg or placebo, administered orally once daily for 6 weeks. Prespecified analyses evaluated change from baseline to Day 43 in individual Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) item scores in the modified intent-to-treat population (mITT) and bipolar I and bipolar II disorder subgroups. Post hoc analyses investigated the MADRS anhedonia factor and categorical shifts in MADRS item scores. In the mITT, there was significant improvement from baseline to Day 43 with lumateperone 42 mg compared with placebo for all 10 MADRS items; most MADRS items significantly improved in subgroups with bipolar I (9 items) and bipolar II disorder (8 items). A significantly higher proportion of patients receiving lumateperone compared with placebo shifted from baseline MADRS item score ≥4 to ≤2 at end of treatment in Reported Sadness, Reduced Sleep, Concentration Difficulties, Lassitude, Inability to Feel, and Pessimistic Thoughts. Lumateperone significantly improved the MADRS anhedonia factor from baseline to Day 43 compared with placebo in the mITT (effect size, -0.47) and subgroups with bipolar I (-0.36) and bipolar II disorder (-0.90). Lumateperone 42 mg treatment significantly improved depression symptoms compared with placebo, with consistent efficacy across a broad range of symptoms in people with bipolar I and bipolar II disorder.

Proof-of-concept randomized controlled trial of single-session nitrous oxide treatment for refractory bipolar depression: Focus on cerebrovascular target engagement

BACKGROUND

There remain few efficacious treatments for bipolar depression, which dominates the course of bipolar disorder (BD). Despite multiple studies reporting associations between depression and cerebral blood flow (CBF), little is known regarding CBF as a treatment target, or predictor and/or indicator of treatment response, in BD. Nitrous oxide, an anesthetic gas with vasoactive and putative antidepressant properties, has a long history as a neuroimaging probe. We undertook an experimental medicine paradigm, coupling in-scanner single-session nitrous oxide treatment of bipolar depression with repeated measures of CBF.

METHODS

In this double-blind randomized controlled trial, 25 adults with BD I/II and current treatment-refractory depression received either: (1) nitrous oxide (20 min at 25% concentration) plus intravenous saline (n = 12), or (2) medical air plus intravenous midazolam (2 mg total; n = 13). Study outcomes included changes in depression severity (Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale scores, primary) and changes in CBF (via arterial spin labeling magnetic resonance imaging).

RESULTS

There were no significant between-group differences in 24-h post-treatment MADRS change or treatment response. However, the nitrous oxide group had significantly greater same-day reductions in depression severity. Lower baseline regional CBF predicted greater 24-h post-treatment MADRS reductions with nitrous oxide but not midazolam. In region-of-interest and voxel-wise analyses, there was a pattern of regional CBF reductions following treatment with midazolam versus nitrous oxide.

CONCLUSIONS

Present findings, while tentative and based on secondary endpoints, suggest differential associations of nitrous oxide versus midazolam with bipolar depression severity and cerebral hemodynamics. Larger studies integrating neuroimaging targets and repeated nitrous oxide treatment sessions are warranted.

Effects of Treatment of Acute Major Depressive Episodes in Bipolar I Versus Bipolar II Disorders With Quetiapine

BACKGROUND

Several second-generation antipsychotic drugs (SGAs) have evidence of benefit for acute major depressive episodes in bipolar disorder (BD) patients. However, their comparative efficacy in types I vs II BD (BD1 vs BD2) remains uncertain.

METHODS

We carried out a systematic literature search for randomized, double-blinded, controlled treatment trials for acute major depressive episodes involving head-to-head comparisons of BD1 versus BD2 subjects, followed by meta-analyses and meta-regression modeling.

RESULTS

Seven reports met out inclusion criteria, yielding 22 comparisons of SGA versus placebo averaging 8.3 weeks in duration. All trials involved quetiapine, which was much more effective than placebo (pooled standardized mean difference [SMD] = 1.76 [95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.12], P < 0.0001). Estimated % improvement averaged 53.5% [46.5-60.5] with quetiapine vs 39.8% [34.2-45.4] with placebo ( P < 0.0001); their ratio was somewhat larger with BD1 (1.56 [1.26-1.86]) versus BD2 subjects (1.22 [1.07-1.37], P = 0.04; as was SMD (BD1: 2.35 [1.83-2.86]; BD2: SMD = 1.44 [1.05-1.82]). Meta-regression found diagnosis (BD1 > BD2) to be the only factor significantly associated with the meta-analytic outcome.

CONCLUSIONS

Although data are limited, depressed BD1 patients may respond somewhat better to quetiapine than BD2. Additional head-to-head diagnostic comparisons are needed with other SGAs, as well as evaluation of monotherapy versus various combinations that include SGAs in both short- and long-term use.

Investigating and Resolving Cardiotoxicity Induced by COVID-19 Treatments using Human Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocytes and Engineered Heart Tissues

Coronavirus disease 2019 continues to spread worldwide. Given the urgent need for effective treatments, many clinical trials are ongoing through repurposing approved drugs. However, clinical data regarding the cardiotoxicity of these drugs are limited. Human pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hCMs) represent a powerful tool for assessing drug-induced cardiotoxicity. Here, by using hCMs, it is demonstrated that four antiviral drugs, namely, apilimod, remdesivir, ritonavir, and lopinavir, exhibit cardiotoxicity in terms of inducing cell death, sarcomere disarray, and dysregulation of calcium handling and contraction, at clinically relevant concentrations. Human engineered heart tissue (hEHT) model is used to further evaluate the cardiotoxic effects of these drugs and it is found that they weaken hEHT contractile function. RNA-seq analysis reveals that the expression of genes that regulate cardiomyocyte function, such as sarcomere organization (TNNT2, MYH6) and ion homeostasis (ATP2A2, HCN4), is significantly altered after drug treatments. Using high-throughput screening of approved drugs, it is found that ceftiofur hydrochloride, astaxanthin, and quetiapine fumarate can ameliorate the cardiotoxicity of remdesivir, with astaxanthin being the most prominent one. These results warrant caution and careful monitoring when prescribing these therapies in patients and provide drug candidates to limit remdesivir-induced cardiotoxicity.

Adjunctive antidepressants for the acute treatment of bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The depressive phase of bipolar disorder causes significant functional impairment and disease burden. The efficacy and safety of antidepressants in the treatment of bipolar depression has long been a subject of debate.

AIMS

To synthesize evidence of the effectiveness, risk of mood switching, and tolerability of adjunctive antidepressants in acute bipolar depression compared to using mood stabilizers or antipsychotics alone.

METHOD

Multiple databases were searched for randomized controlled trials, including open label and double-blinded, for patients ages 18 or older with acute bipolar depression, comparing efficacy and adverse events in those who used adjunctive antidepressants versus without. Risk of bias and outcomes were assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. This study has PROSPERO registration CRD42016037701.

RESULTS

Nineteen studies met inclusion criteria. Adjunctive antidepressants showed no significant effect on improving response rate (RR=1.10, 95%CI: 0.98-1.23). Subgroup analysis showed that adjunctive antidepressants with antipsychotics had a small but significantly better response rate compared to antipsychotics alone, which was not seen with adjunctive antidepressants with mood stabilizers. However, that finding was limited by studies predominantly using olanzapine as the antipsychotic medication. Adjunctive antidepressants had no clinically significant impact (but a small statistically significant impact) on improving depressive symptoms (SMD=-0.13, 95%CI: -0.24 to -0.02). There was no association with increased mood switch (RR=0.97, 95%CI: 0.68-1.39) and there was an association with lower dropout due to inefficacy (RR=0.66, 95%CI: 0.45∼0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no evidence of adjunctive antidepressants clinically improving response rate or depressive symptoms for acute bipolar depression. They are well tolerated, without increasing the risk of short-term mood switch.

Index depressive episode and antidepressant exposure were associated with illness characteristics of pediatric bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) is a serious, recurrent disorder leading to severe functional impairment. As a first mood episode, index episode could affect the long-term course of the illness. This study aimed to investigate the clinical characteristics of youth with PBD from our multicenter, nationwide, naturalistic follow-up samples and to identify (i) the effects of index mood episode and (ii) the effect of previous antidepressant treatments on the age at mania onset of PBD.

METHOD

The study sample consisted of 271 youth with BD-I followed by the child and adolescent psychiatry clinics of seven different university hospitals and three research state hospitals, representing six geographic regions across Turkey. All diagnoses were made according to structured interviews, and all data were retrospectively obtained from clinical records by the clinicians.

RESULTS

When patients with index depressive/mixed episodes (IDE, n=129) and patients with index (hypo)manic episodes (IME, n=142) were compared, the total number of mood episodes and rapid cycling feature were significantly higher in the IDE group than in the IME group. The Cox regression analysis adjusted for sociodemographic and illness characteristics revealed female adolescents in the IDE group treated with antidepressants were more likely to have an earlier onset of mania (hazard ratio=2.03, 95% confidence interval=1.31-3.12, p=0.001).

CONCLUSION

This is the first large-scale nationwide follow-up study in Turkey that indicated prior antidepressant treatments were associated with an earlier onset of mania in youth, particularly in adolescent females. Larger prospective studies are needed to identify neurodevelopmental processes underlying PBD and initiate prevention approaches.

Differences in prescription patterns between real-world outpatients with bipolar I and II disorders in the MUSUBI survey

OBJECTIVE

There is limited information available on the prescription of psychotropic agents to patients with bipolar I (BD-I) and bipolar II disorder (BD-II). The purpose of this study was to investigate the characteristics of drug therapy in BD-I and BD-II outpatients, particularly with regard to antidepressants.

METHODS

In 2017, the MUlticenter treatment SUrvey for BIpolar disorder in Japanese psychiatric clinics (MUSUBI) study collected data on current mental status, medications, and other factors from 2774 outpatients with BD-I or BD-II.

RESULTS

There were significant differences in the rates of prescriptions for mood stabilizers, antipsychotics and antidepressants. Mood stabilizers and antipsychotics were prescribed at higher rates to patients with BD-I (mood stabilizers; BD-I 86.0%, BD-II 80.8%, p < 0.001; antipsychotics; BD-I 61.5%, BD-II 47.8%, p < 0.001), and antidepressants were prescribed at higher rates to patients with BD-II (BD-I 32.1%, BD-II 46.4%, p < 0.001). The most commonly prescribed antidepressants were escitalopram for patients with BD-I and duloxetine for patients with BD-II. Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) were the most common class of antidepressants prescribed to patients with BD. With regard to combination therapy, combinations containing antidepressants were often prescribed to patients with BD-II.

CONCLUSION

There was a difference in the prescription of psychotropic agents between patients with BD-I and BD-II. The outpatient prescriptions for BD in Japan were mood stabilizers and antipsychotics, which generally followed the guidelines. There is insufficient evidence regarding the effects of the prescribed antidepressants and the risk of manic episodes, and further evidence needs to be collected.

Efficacy and acceptability of pharmacotherapy for comorbid anxiety symptoms in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Anxiety symptoms are highly prevalent among individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) but there is little guidance on pharmacotherapy for these symptoms. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the available evidence for pharmacotherapy of comorbid anxiety symptoms in BD.

METHODS

Completed randomized clinical trials (RCTs) of medications for BD published prior to December 2020 were identified through a systematic search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, Web of Science, clinicaltrials.gov, and the ISRCTN. Data from RCTs measuring anxiety symptoms at baseline and endpoint and all-cause discontinuation were pooled to compare the efficacy and acceptability of medications with control conditions.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven RCTs met our inclusion criteria; 13 placebo-controlled RCTs with 2175 participants had sufficient data to be included in the meta-analysis assessing anxiety symptoms. Compared with placebo, the overall effect size of medications (primarily atypical antipsychotics) on anxiety symptoms was small with a standardized mean difference (SMD) = -0.22 (95% CI: -0.34 to -0.11). Study heterogeneity was low (I²  = 26%). The acceptability of these medications was comparable with placebo with odds ratio of discontinuation from all causes = 0.98 (95% CI: 0.91-1.06).

CONCLUSION

There is limited evidence for a small anxiolytic effect and good acceptability of pharmacotherapy (primarily atypical antipsychotics) in the treatment of comorbid anxiety symptoms in BD. These results highlight the need for further research on medications other than atypical antipsychotics.

Response and remission rates during 24 weeks of mood-stabilizing treatment for bipolar depression depending on early non-response

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the probability of bipolar depression response at 24 weeks given initial non-response.

METHODS

We combined two multi-site, 24-week trials including similar populations following the same evidence-based guidelines randomizing patients to lithium or quetiapine. Additional mood-stabilizing treatment was possible if clinically indicated. We report cumulative proportions of response (>50% improvement in MADRS) and remission (MADRS<10).

RESULTS

We included 592 participants with bipolar depression (mean 39 years, 59% female, mean MADRS 25). Among 393 (66%) participants without response after 2 weeks, 46% responded by 24 weeks; for 291 (49%) without response at 4 weeks, 40% responded and 33% remitted by 24 weeks; for 222 (38%) without a response at 6 weeks, 36% responded and 29% remitted by 24 weeks; for 185 (31%) without a response at 8 weeks, 29% responded and 24% remitted by 24 weeks. Rates were similar for participants who had started an additional mood-stabilizing drug during the first 6 or 8 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with bipolar depression and non-response after 6 weeks treatment, representing an adequate bipolar depression trial, only one-third responded by 24 weeks. These results highlight the need for better treatment alternatives for non-responders to evidence-based treatments for bipolar depression.

Can Quetiapine Prolong the Antidepressant Effect of Ketamine?: A 5-Year Follow-up Study

PURPOSE

Ketamine, a noncompetitive, high-affinity antagonist of the N-methyl-d-aspartate-type glutamate receptor, has a rapid effect in patients with treatment-resistant disorder, but many patients who respond to intravenous ketamine relapse within several days. The objective of this study was to examine the long-term outcome of patients' mood 5 years after ketamine treatment.

METHODS

Sixteen electroconvulsive therapy referrals received at least 1 intravenous ketamine treatment in addition to their stable antidepressant medications. Depression was evaluated using the Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Clinician-Rated, Hamilton Rating Scales for Depression, and Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. Anxiety was measured using the Hamilton Rating Scale.

RESULTS

Of 16 patients treated, 6 achieved complete remission, 3 partially responded, and 7 did not respond. At baseline, all patients were treated with antidepressants, 14 patients were also treated with neuroleptics, of whom 5 patients were treated with quetiapine. The time to relapse in the 5 patients taking quetiapine was significantly longer than in patients who were taking other neuroleptics (965.83 ± 824.68 vs 80.5 ± 114.3, Z = 7.001, P = 0.0001). At the 5-year follow-up, 3 of the patients taking quetiapine maintained their remission. Overall levels of depression and anxiety at all times were improved in comparison to baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

Our follow-up results suggest that the combination of quetiapine and ketamine can prolong time to relapse after ketamine treatment in patients with treatment-resistant disorder.

Psychotic Depression: Diagnosis, Differential Diagnosis, and Treatment

Psychotic depression was initially considered to be at one end of a continuum of severity of major depression. Subsequent experience demonstrated that psychosis is an independent trait that may accompany mood disorders of varying severity. While much has been learned about the impact of severe mood congruent delusions and hallucinations on the course and treatment response of depression, less is known about fleeting or mild psychosis, mood incongruent features, or psychotic symptoms that reflect traumatic experiences. Acute treatment of psychotic unipolar depression generally involves the combination of an antidepressant and an antipsychotic drug or electroconvulsive therapy. There is inadequate information about maintenance treatment of unipolar psychotic depression and acute and chronic treatment of psychotic bipolar disorder. Decision-making therefore still must rely in part on clinical experience.

Quetiapine in the Anxiety Dimension of Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Literature to Support Clinical Practice

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder are heterogeneous conditions characterized by marked variations in mood. High levels of anxiety are often present in these conditions and are associated with increased suicidal risk, increased disease duration, and treatment resistance. Mood stabilizers or antipsychotics are recommended for the treatment of bipolar disorder in comorbidity with anxiety disorders. This study examines current knowledge to evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine in the treatment of anxiety in mood disorders.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines, selecting randomized control trials that evaluated the efficacy of quetiapine on anxiety symptoms in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder and included anxiety evaluation scales.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

We collected 27 studies (19 with primary data analysis, 8 with secondary data analysis) regarding the use of quetiapine in mood disorders. Quetiapine was more effective than placebo and active comparators in reducing anxiety in unipolar and bipolar patients in 20 of these studies. In 7 studies, quetiapine was not superior to psychoactive comparators or placebo on the anxiety dimension.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Statistical power might be limited by small sample size in 5 of the studies included in our review. Moreover, data on anxiety were a secondary outcome in most studies. Nevertheless, the reported studies show with good levels of concordance that quetiapine is effective in controlling anxiety symptoms in patients with mood disorders. This evidence supports current guidelines and recommendations concerning the use of quetiapine in clinical practice.

Efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics for acute bipolar depression: a network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

While clinical trial evidence has firmly established the efficacy of several atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for treating bipolar depression, no randomized controlled trials (RCT's) comparing AAPs have been conducted. This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy and tolerability of AAP monotherapy in adults with bipolar depression.

METHODS

Efficacy measures included change in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Improvement - Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), response, and remission. Multiple tolerability outcomes were examined. Results from random effects models were reported as difference in change from baseline for continuous variables or odds ratios for dichotomous variables. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the curve cumulative ranking probabilities. Number needed to treat (NNT) and harm (NNH) were calculated.

RESULTS

Eighteen RCT's met inclusion criteria of the systematic literature review. On change in MADRS, lurasidone (- 4.71 [95% Crl - 6.98, - 2.41]), quetiapine (- 4.80 [- 5.93, - 3.72]), olanzapine (- 4.57 [- 5.92, - 3.20]), and cariprazine (- 2.29 [- 3.47, - 1.09]) were more efficacious than placebo. Lurasidone was associated with a significantly greater odds of response (≥50% improvement in MADRS) compared to cariprazine (1.78 [95% Crl 1.08, 2.77]), aripiprazole (2.38 [1.38, 3.85]), and ziprasidone (2.47 [1.41, 3.98]), but was similar to olanzapine (1.68 [0.99,2.65]) and quetiapine (1.25 [0.78, 1.90]). For change in CGI-BP-S-overall score, lurasidone was significantly better than cariprazine (- 0.38 [95% Crl - 0.66,-0.10]) and ziprasidone (- 0.58 [- 0.91,-0.26]), but similar to quetiapine (- 0.08 [- 0.36, 0.19])and olanzapine (- 0.04 [- 1.41, 1.46]). Lurasidone (0.34 kg [95% Crl - 0.22, 0.89]) and aripiprazole (0.20 kg [- 0.59, 1.00]) had a similar weight change compared to placebo, but olanzapine (2.88 kg [2.40, 3.36]), quetiapine (1.17 kg [0.84, 1.49]), and cariprazine (0.65 kg [0.34, 0.96]) were associated with greater weight gain. The NNT for response was the lowest for lurasidone (NNT = 5) followed by quetiapine (NNT = 6), olanzapine (NNT = 10) and cariprazine (NNT = 12).

CONCLUSIONS

In this NMA in adults with bipolar depression, which evaluated change in depressive symptoms (assessed by MADRS) across short-term trials, the largest improvement versus placebo was observed for lurasidone, olanzapine and quetiapine with cariprazine, showing a smaller treatment effect. Aripiprazole and ziprasidone were ineffective for the treatment of bipolar depression. Improvement in CGI-BP-S score for lurasidone was larger than cariprazine and ziprasidone but similar to quetiapine and olanzapine. Based on short term studies lurasidone and aripiprazole had similar weight gain compared to placebo.

Electroreductive Nickel-Catalyzed Thiolation: Efficient Cross-Electrophile Coupling for C-S Formation

Sulfur-containing molecules are of utmost topical importance towards the effective development of pharmaceuticals and functional materials. Herein, we present an efficient and mild electrochemical thiolation by cross-electrophile coupling of alkyl bromides with functionalized bench-stable thiosulfonates to access alkyl sulfides with excellent efficacy and broad functional group tolerance. Cyclic voltammetry and potentiostatic analysis were performed to elucidate mechanistic insights into this electrocatalytic thiolation reaction.

Advances toward precision medicine for bipolar disorder: mechanisms & molecules

Given its chronicity, contribution to disability and morbidity, and prevalence of more than 2%, the effective treatment, and prevention of bipolar disorder represents an area of significant unmet medical need. While more than half a century has passed since the introduction of lithium into widespread use at the birth of modern psychopharmacology, that medication remains a mainstay for the acute treatment and prevention of recurrent mania/hypomania and depression that characterize bipolar disorder. However, the continued limited understanding of how lithium modulates affective behavior and lack of validated cellular and animal models have resulted in obstacles to discovering more effective mood stabilizers with fewer adverse side effects. In particular, while there has been progress in developing new pharmacotherapy for mania, developing effective treatments for acute bipolar depression remain inadequate. Recent large-scale human genetic studies have confirmed the complex, polygenic nature of the risk architecture of bipolar disorder, and its overlap with other major neuropsychiatric disorders. Such discoveries have begun to shed light on the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder. Coupled with broader advances in human neurobiology, neuropharmacology, noninvasive neuromodulation, and clinical trial design, we can envision novel therapeutic strategies informed by defined molecular mechanisms and neural circuits and targeted to the root cause of the pathophysiology. Here, we review recent advances toward the goal of better treatments for bipolar disorder, and we outline major challenges for the field of translational neuroscience that necessitate continued focus on fundamental research and discovery.

Acceptability of Acute and Maintenance Pharmacotherapy of Bipolar Disorder: A Systematic Review of Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to estimate and rank the risk for the discontinuation due to adverse events (DAEs), 7% or more weight gain (WG), and somnolence during the acute and maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder with a mood stabilizer or an antipsychotic monotherapy.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

The search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and clinicaltrials.gov from the inception to December 31, 2018, provided 32 studies in mania, 16 in bipolar depression, and 13 in maintenance. Data of DAEs, WG, and somnolence from each study were extracted. The risk for these variables of an active treatment relative to placebo was estimated with a number needed to harm (NNH) as a single study and pooled sample.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

For DAEs, pooled NNH ranged from 19 with carbamazepine to -21 with quetiapine-XR in mania, 11 with quetiapine-IR 600 mg/d to -37 with olanzapine/fluoxetine combination in bipolar depression, and 5 with lithium to -8 with asenapine in maintenance. For WG, pooled NNH ranged from 9 with olanzapine to -78 with aripiprazole in mania, 5 with olanzapine to -112 with lithium in bipolar depression, and 4 with olanzapine to 126 with asenapine in maintenance. For somnolence, pooled NNH was from 5 with carbamazepine to 23 with cariprazine in mania, 3 with quetiapine-XR 300 mg/d to 79 with lurasidone in bipolar depression, and 11 with olanzapine to -49 with aripiprazole in maintenance.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

All medications studied in bipolar disorder were relatively well tolerated during different phases of treatment; however, the risk for short- and long-term WG and somnolence varied widely among included psychotropics.

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program: An update on bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program (PAPHSS) published algorithms for bipolar depression in 1999 and 2010. Developments over the past 9 years suggest that another update is needed.

METHODS

The 2010 algorithm and associated references were reevaluated. A literature search was conducted on PubMed for recent studies and review articles to see what changes in the recommendations were justified. Exceptions to the main algorithm for special patient populations, including those with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance use disorders, anxiety disorders, and women of childbearing potential, and those with common medical comorbidities were considered.

RESULTS

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still the first-line option for patients in need of urgent treatment. Five medications are recommended for early usage in acute bipolar depression, singly or in combinations when monotherapy fails, the order to be determined by considerations such as side effect vulnerability and patient preference. The five are lamotrigine, lurasidone, lithium, quetiapine, and cariprazine. After trials of these, possible options include antidepressants (bupropion and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are preferred) or valproate (very small evidence-base). In bipolar II depression, the support for antidepressants is a little stronger but depression with mixed features and rapid cycling would usually lead to further postponement of antidepressants. Olanzapine+fluoxetine, though Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for bipolar depression, is not considered until beyond this point, due to metabolic side effects. The algorithm concludes with a table of other possible treatments that have some evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This revision incorporates the latest FDA-approved treatments (lurasidone and cariprazine) and important new studies and organizes the evidence systematically.

Population Pharmacokinetics Analysis of Quetiapine Extended-release Formulation in Japanese Patients with Bipolar Depression

PURPOSE

The objectives of this study were to explore covariates of plasma quetiapine concentrations after oral administration of quetiapine extended-release formulation (XR), and to examine the exposure-response relationship in Japanese patients with bipolar depression, using population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) modeling.

METHODS

In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of quetiapine XR in patients with bipolar depression, plasma for the measurement of quetiapine concentration was collected at weeks 2, 4, 8, 12, 20, 28, and 52 during oral administration of 150 or 300 mg once daily of quetiapine XR before bedtime. A PopPK model of quetiapine XR was developed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling with first-order conditional estimation with interactions. The exposure-response relationship was examined using post-hoc exposures. The post-hoc AUC estimate was plotted against the change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (ΔMADRS) total score from baseline to 8 weeks following once-daily doses at 300 mg.

FINDINGS

The final PopPK analysis dataset contained 322 patients and 1162 observations (cutoff data at week 28; cutoff date, February 2016). The plasma quetiapine concentration-time profile in patients with bipolar depression after oral administration of quetiapine XR was represented well using a 1-compartment with first-order absorption model. Covariate analysis led to the selection of γ-glutamyl transpeptidase on apparent oral clearance and body weight on apparent volume of distribution as covariates. The final population mean values of apparent oral clearance and apparent volume of distribution were 87.7 L/h and 277 L, respectively, and the interindividual %CVs were 32.6% and 75.0%, respectively.

IMPLICATIONS

The effects of covariates on PK parameters were not large compared with the interindividual variability. In addition, there was no clear relationship between the AUC and ΔMADRS. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01725308.

Cariprazine in the treatment of Bipolar Disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Cariprazine is a partial agonist at D2/D3 receptors that has been approved for the treatment of mania associated with bipolar disorder (BD). This meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and tolerability of cariprazine in the treatment of BD.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials investigating the efficacy of cariprazine in BD were included. Of the 391 studies yielded by search, 7 were included. The PRISMA protocol was followed and a set of analyses involving random-effects model with restricted maximum-likelihood estimator were used to synthesize effect sizes.

RESULTS

Cariprazine was associated with a moderate and significant reduction of manic symptoms based on YMRS change scores (SMD: -0.52; 95%CI: -0.82 to -0.21; P = .018). Cariprazine resulted in significantly higher remission (OR: 2.05; 95%CI: 1.61-2.61; P = .006) and response rates (OR: 2.31; 95%CI: 1.35-3.95; P = .021) for manic and mixed episodes compared with placebo. Both cariprazine 1.5 mg and 3 mg doses were associated with small but significant reduction in depressive symptoms assessed with MADRS scores (SMD: -0.26, 95%CI: -0.49 to -0.02; P = .040) (SMD: -0.21, 95%CI: -0.41 to -0.01; P = .045), respectively. Cariprazine was significantly associated with the development of adverse effects but not with dropouts due to these adverse effects, when compared to placebo.

CONCLUSION

Cariprazine appears to be safe and efficacious in the treatment of acute mania and mixed episodes associated with BD. Cariprazine at doses of 1.5-3 mg/day is efficacious in acute bipolar depression but the effect sizes were smaller. Controlled studies evaluating its efficacy for prophylaxis are needed.

Efficacy and safety of cariprazine in bipolar I depression: A double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine in the treatment of the depressed phase of bipolar I disorder in adults (NCT02670538).

METHODS

In this phase 3 double-blind placebo-controlled study, adult patients with bipolar I disorder according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual - 5th Edition criteria and a current depressive episode were randomized to placebo (n = 167), cariprazine 1.5 mg/day (n = 168) or cariprazine 3.0 mg/day (n = 158). Efficacy parameters were changes in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores (primary) and Clinical Global Impressions - Severity (CGI-S) scores (secondary) from baseline to Week 6 compared to placebo. A mixed-model for repeated measures was used to estimate the least-squares mean differences (LSMD); P-values were adjusted for multiplicity. Adverse events (AEs), laboratory results, vital signs, and suicide risk were monitored.

RESULTS

Cariprazine 1.5 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms on the primary (MADRS LSMD = -2.5; adjusted P = .0417) and secondary (CGI-S LSMD = -0.3; adjusted P = .0417) efficacy parameters vs placebo; differences were not statistically significant for cariprazine 3.0 mg/day. Common treatment-emergent AEs (≥5% in either cariprazine group and at least twice the incidence of placebo) were akathisia, restlessness, nausea, and fatigue. Mean metabolic parameter changes were low and generally comparable among groups; mean weight increases were ≤0.5 kg for all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cariprazine 1.5 mg/day significantly reduced depressive symptoms in adults with bipolar I depression compared to placebo, but differences were not significant for cariprazine 3.0 mg/day. The safety and tolerability profiles were similar to previous studies of cariprazine.

Postmortem analysis of quetiapine and pregabalin in human bone

In this study quetiapine and pregabalin were analyzed in human bones. A method previously developed for the determination of antidepressants in human bone was tested for the analysis of these two substances. Bones were pulverized and subjected to the extraction protocol, and after undergoing solid-phase extraction, samples were analyzed using gas chromatography-mass spectrometry. The assay was validated in the range 0.3-500 ng/mg, mean analytical recovery was 76.9% for quetiapine and 90.9% for pregabalin, matrix effect was 83% for quetiapine and 91% for pregabalin and process efficiency was 63.8% for quetiapine and 82.7% for pregabalin. The intra- and inter-day precision was below 3% in all cases and the intra- and inter-assay accuracy values were in almost all cases better than 12%. The validated method was then applied to bone samples from forensic cases. Drugs were detected in bone in 2 of the 3 blood positive cases. The approximate concentrations in bone were 40 ng/mg for pregabalin and 7 ng/mg for quetiapine. To our knowledge, this is the first time these substances were detected in bones. With this study the number of substances with a validated protocol to be used in human bones in case of necessity is expanded.

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).

Evaluation of cariprazine in the treatment of bipolar I and II depression: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial

This double-blind placebo-controlled, fixed/flexible-dose phase 2 trial assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine vs. placebo for depressive episodes associated with bipolar I or II disorder. Primary endpoint was change in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total scores (baseline to week 8), and secondary endpoint was mean Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score (week 8). Patients were randomized (N = 233) 1:1:1 to placebo, 'low-dose' 0.25-0.5 mg/day or 'high-dose' 1.5-3.0 mg/day cariprazine. Adverse events, laboratory results, vital signs, extrapyramidal symptoms, and suicide risk were monitored. Neither cariprazine group significantly separated from placebo in primary (mixed-effect model repeated measures MADRS least-squares mean differences: low-dose = -0.7, P = 0.7408; high-dose = 0.0, P = 0.9961) or secondary efficacy measures. No new safety signals with cariprazine were observed and common treatment-emergent adverse events (≥5% of cariprazine patients and twice the rate of placebo) included insomnia, akathisia, dry mouth, nausea, weight increased, diarrhea, restlessness, vomiting, musculoskeletal stiffness, migraine, and cough. Metabolic and weight changes were generally similar for cariprazine and placebo. Factors that may have affected the outcome of the trial were identified, which helped to inform the design and conduct of subsequent phase 2b/3 clinical trials of cariprazine in bipolar depression.

Efficacy and tolerability of adjunctive modafinil/armodafinil in bipolar depression: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the dopaminergic-enhancing agent modafinil/armodafinil (MoArm) as adjunctive treatment for bipolar depression.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of major electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adjunctive MoArm that included patients with bipolar I (BP-I) or bipolar II (BP-II) depression. Data for response/remission and all-cause discontinuation were analyzed. Effect size was summarized by relative risk (RR) using a random effect model.

RESULTS

Of 58 studies, five RCTs (N = 795 drug, N = 792 placebo) met inclusion criteria. Four armodafinil studies included only BP-I patients and one modafinil study included both bipolar subtypes with limited heterogeneity (I²  = 34%, P = .19; I²  = 18%, P = .30). Compared to placebo, augmentation with MoArm was associated with significantly greater rates of treatment response (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01-1.37; P = .03) and remission (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10-1.73; P = .005). All-cause discontinuation was not different than placebo (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.89-1.30; P = .45) with no evidence of increased risk of mood switch or suicide attempts with MoArm (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.39-2.5; P = .98; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.37-2.85; P = .97).

CONCLUSION

This narrower scope meta-analysis of one drug for one disease suggests that adjunctive MoArm may represent a novel therapeutic intervention. Further studies delineating the subtypes of bipolar depression responsive to these novel dopaminergic-enhancing agents are encouraged.

[German S3 guidelines on bipolar disorders-first update 2019 : What is new in pharmacotherapy?]

BACKGROUND

German S3 guidelines are subject to the highest methodological standards. This includes that they are only valid for a certain time period. Following the first edition in 2012 the first update of the S3 guidelines on bipolar disorder has now been published (2019).

OBJECTIVE

What has changed in the field of pharmacological recommendations comparing the first edition with the update in 2019?

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Comparison of the 1st edition from 2012 with the update from 2019 of the S3 guidelines for the diagnostics and treatment of bipolar disorders.

RESULTS

The three principle treatment targets of acute treatment of bipolar depression, acute treatment of mania and phase prophylaxis (maintenance treatment) can be distinguished. For acute treatment of bipolar depression, for the first time a medication has received a level A recommendation: quetiapine. For the acute treatment of mania, several drugs are still recommended with the same level of recommendation (B). Asenapine has been added as the tenth substance. Lithium is still the only drug with a level A recommendation for maintenance and prophylactic treatment and is also the only drug approved for this indication without restrictions. A new recommendation is that in the absence of contraindications, phase prophylaxis with a serum level of at least 0.6 mmol/l should be carried out. With a B recommendation, quetiapine has been added to the drugs for phase prophylactic treatment.

CONCLUSION

The S3 guidelines make recommendations at the highest scientific level. In view of these findings, lithium is clearly underutilized for maintenance therapy. In the absence of clear contraindications (advanced renal insufficiency), every patient with bipolar disease should be given the chance of lithium prophylaxis for an adequately long period.

The Treatment of Bipolar Depression: Current Status and Future Perspectives

Purpose of Review

This paper aims to review current available treatment options and to consider future directions in the treatment of bipolar depression.

Recent Findings

There are a limited number of established treatments that have demonstrated varied efficacy in acute bipolar depression including modern antipsychotics (quetiapine, lurasidone, olanzapine ± fluoxetine and recently cariprazine) and mood stabilisers (lamotrigine and valproate). Lithium has a role in protecting against depressive relapses and suicide. Alternative and experimental treatments including pramipexole, modafinil/armodafinil, omega-3 fatty acids and thyroxine may be used to augment the treatment of bipolar depression. Ketamine represents a major breakthrough, producing rapid reductions in depressive symptoms even in cases of treatment-resistance, but challenges remain in how best to maintain response and reduce unwanted side effects.

Summary

There remains uncertainty with regard to the relative efficacy and safety of established and experimental treatments for bipolar depression. Further work using consistent, optimal trial designs as well as further investigation into novel compounds and treatment interventions is warranted.

Pharmacogenomic Characterization in Bipolar Spectrum Disorders

The holistic approach of personalized medicine, merging clinical and molecular characteristics to tailor the diagnostic and therapeutic path to each individual, is steadily spreading in clinical practice. Psychiatric disorders represent one of the most difficult diagnostic challenges, given their frequent mixed nature and intrinsic variability, as in bipolar disorders and depression. Patients misdiagnosed as depressed are often initially prescribed serotonergic antidepressants, a treatment that can exacerbate a previously unrecognized bipolar condition. Thanks to the use of the patient's genomic profile, it is possible to recognize such risk and at the same time characterize specific genetic assets specifically associated with bipolar spectrum disorder, as well as with the individual response to the various therapeutic options. This provides the basis for molecular diagnosis and the definition of pharmacogenomic profiles, thus guiding therapeutic choices and allowing a safer and more effective use of psychotropic drugs. Here, we report the pharmacogenomics state of the art in bipolar disorders and suggest an algorithm for therapeutic regimen choice.

Cariprazine for bipolar depression: What is the number needed to treat, number needed to harm and likelihood to be helped or harmed?

OBJECTIVE

Cariprazine is an oral antipsychotic approved in the US for the treatment of schizophrenia, acute bipolar mania, and most recently, bipolar depression. The aim of this systematic review is to describe the efficacy, tolerability and safety of cariprazine for the treatment of depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder (bipolar depression) in adults.

DATA SOURCES

The pivotal registration trials were accessed by querying http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ and http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, for the search terms "cariprazine" AND "bipolar" AND "depression," and by also querying the Web of Science commercial database for clinical poster abstracts, and by asking the manufacturer for copies of posters presented at congresses. Product labelling provided additional information.

STUDY SELECTION

Double-blind placebo-controlled studies in adults with bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION

Descriptions of the principal results and calculation of number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed to harm (NNH) for relevant dichotomous outcomes were calculated from the available study reports and other sources of information.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Cariprazine differs from other antipsychotics in that it has a 10-fold higher affinity for dopamine D3 receptors than for D2 receptors. Cariprazine's principal active metabolite, didesmethyl-cariprazine (DDCAR), has a half-life of 1-3 weeks and at steady state DDCAR is the predominant circulating moiety. Four double-blind placebo-controlled studies of cariprazine for bipolar depression were found of which three were considered positive and provided data on efficacy; all four studies were used to assess tolerability. Rates of treatment response, defined by a ≥50% reduction from baseline on the Montgomery-Asburg Depression Ratting Scale (MADRS) total score at study endpoint, for the approved doses of 1.5 and 3.0 mg/d (pooled) vs placebo were 46.3% vs 35.9% (NNT 10, 95% CI 7-21). Corresponding rates for remission (defined as MADRS total score ≤10 at endpoint) were 30.2% vs 20.9% (NNT 11, 95% CI 8-22). Discontinuation rates because of an adverse event (AE) were 6.7% for cariprazine (all doses pooled) vs 4.8% for placebo (NNH 51, ns). Product labelling lists the most common AEs as nausea, akathisia, restlessness and extrapyramidal symptoms. Patients receiving cariprazine 3.0 vs 1.5 mg/d were more likely to experience AEs and discontinue the trials because of an AE.

CONCLUSIONS

Cariprazine is the fourth agent approved for bipolar depression in the US. The likelihood to experience a benefit (response or remission) is substantially greater than the likelihood to encounter a discontinuation because of an AE. Direct, head-to-head comparisons with the other approved choices for bipolar depression in the "real world" are needed.

Comparison of quetiapine immediate- and extended-release formulations for bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety/tolerability of quetiapine extended-release 300 mg/day (QUEXR300), quetiapine immediate-release 600 mg/day (QUEIR600), and quetiapine immediate-release 300 mg/day (QUEIR300) formulations for treating bipolar depression. A random-effect network meta-analysis of 8-week, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials was used to determine the most optimal agent for intervention. Remission rate was set as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes were response rate, improvement in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale score, discontinuation rate, and the incidence of individual adverse events. Seven eligible studies including 3267 participants were included in the meta-analysis. The QUEIR600, QUEIR300, and QUEXR300 groups were superior to the placebo group in every efficacy outcome; however, there were no significant differences in the efficacy outcomes among the treatment groups. All treatment groups exhibited higher incidences of extrapyramidal symptoms, dry mouth, somnolence, constipation, and increase in body weight than the placebo group. The QUEIR600 and QUEIR300 groups had higher incidences of dizziness than the placebo group. The QUEIR600 group had a higher discontinuation rate due to adverse events than the placebo group, and the QUEIR300 group had higher blood HbA1c levels than the placebo group. The QUEIR600 and QUEXR300 groups had higher incidences of ≥7% weight gain than the placebo group. The QUEXR300 group had a higher incidence of fatigue than the QURIR300 and placebo groups. In conclusion, there were no significant differences in the efficacies of QUEIR600, QUEIR300, and QUEXR300 in treating bipolar depression; moreover, tolerance to QUEIR600 might be worse than the other treatments.

Off-Label Use of Second-generation Antipsychotics in Bipolar Disorder: A Survey of Italian Psychiatrists

Bipolar disorder (BD) is characterized by recurrent depressive and manic episodes. Lithium, valproate, lamotrigine, and some second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) are the most typical pharmacological treatments for BD, the main goal being mood stabilization. However, despite these treatments, most patients continue to experience recurrent mood episodes and residual symptoms. Findings from several studies suggest that some SGAs may be beneficial beyond approved indications. The goal of the survey presented in this article was to examine Italian psychiatrists' attitudes concerning the off-label use of SGAs in depressive and maintenance phases of BD. A questionnaire about the off-label prescription of SGAs was e-mailed to 300 psychiatrists from Northern, Central, and Southern Italy affiliated with the Italian Society of Psychopharmacology (SINPF) to investigate the frequency of and motivation for off-label use of SGAs and evaluate the psychiatrists' attitude toward use of specific SGAs in BD; 202 questionnaires were completed. The respondents were equally distributed in terms of sex, and the mean age of respondents was 44.1 years. The majority of the sample reported use of SGAs for off-label indications either very often (16.7%), often (33.7%), or occasionally (34.7%). The main motivation for off-label use of the SGAs was the presence of published evidence (51.5%), followed by patients' nonresponse to previous treatment (37.1%). With regard to the use of specific SGAs in BD, off-label aripiprazole was considered appropriate for depressive episodes by 46% of the psychiatrists, followed by olanzapine which was considered appropriate by 33.7%. For maintenance treatment of BD, off-label asenapine was considered appropriate by 45% of the psychiatrists, followed by long-acting aripiprazole and olanzapine pamoate, which were considered appropriate by 37.1% and 23.8%, respectively. In summary, ~50% of Italian psychiatrists frequently (very often or often) prescribe SGAs for off-label indications. Given the relatively limited number of indicated effective treatments for BD, the use of some SGAs off-label may be considered appropriate when dealing with patients whose BD is resistant to medications with labeled indications for BD.

Psychopharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics for Bipolar Depression

Bipolar disorder is a chronic illness that affects 2%-4% of U.S. adults during their lifetime. The course of bipolar disorder is commonly characterized by prolonged periods of depression interspersed with manic-hypomanic episodes. Management of depression among patients with bipolar disorder is challenging because of the limited number of medications currently approved by the Food and Drug Administration, the high proportion of patients who do not respond to these medications, and the metabolic and other side effects associated with long-term use of these medications. In addition to reviewing the clinical options available to patients with bipolar depression and their treatment providers, this article presents an evidence-based management approach and discusses the off-label uses of currently available treatments and experimental therapeutics under development.

Potential Utility of Biased GPCR Signaling for Treatment of Psychiatric Disorders

Tremendous advances have been made recently in the identification of genes and signaling pathways associated with the risks for psychiatric disorders such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. However, there has been a marked reduction in the pipeline for the development of new psychiatric drugs worldwide, mainly due to the complex causes that underlie these disorders. G-protein coupled receptors (GPCRs) are the most common targets of antipsychotics such as quetiapine and aripiprazole, and play pivotal roles in controlling brain function by regulating multiple downstream signaling pathways. Progress in our understanding of GPCR signaling has opened new possibilities for selective drug development. A key finding has been provided by the concept of biased ligands, which modulate some, but not all, of a given receptor's downstream signaling pathways. Application of this concept raises the possibility that the biased ligands can provide therapeutically desirable outcomes with fewer side effects. Instead, this application will require a detailed understanding of the mode of action of antipsychotics that drive distinct pharmacologies. We review our current understanding of the mechanistic bases for multiple signaling modes by antipsychotics and the potential of the biased modulators to treat mental disorders.

Long-term mood/antidepressant effects of quetiapine extended-release formulation: an open-label, non-controlled extension study in Japanese patients with bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

In an 8-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study, an extended-release formulation of quetiapine, quetiapine XR, demonstrated efficacy and safety in Japanese patients with bipolar depression. Bipolar disorder is a chronic disease requiring continuous treatment.

METHODS

This was a long-term (52-week), open-label, non-controlled extension study to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of quetiapine XR in Japanese patients with bipolar depression who had previously completed the initial 8-week double-blind study. Efficacy was determined by the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Hamilton Depression Scale 17-item (HAM-D₁₇), and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar scale (CGI-BP). Safety evaluations included analysis of adverse events, clinical laboratory measures, vital signs, Drug-induced Extrapyramidal Symptoms Scale, Young Mania Rating Scale, and the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale.

RESULTS

The mean (SD) MADRS total score decreased from 30.9 (6.9) at baseline to 16.1 (10.6) at week 8, and eventually to 9.1 (8.7) at week 52. The sustained efficacy of quetiapine XR treatment was also shown using HAM-D₁₇ total scores, CGI-BP-Severity and Change evaluations. The most common adverse events were somnolence, nasopharyngitis, and thirst. Long-term treatment with quetiapine XR caused no substantial changes in the safety profiles, including clinical laboratory parameters, and no new safety concerns were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of quetiapine XR was sustained long-term and no new safety concerns were identified in Japanese patients with bipolar depression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Registration: NCT01725308. Date of registration; 12th November 2012 (retrospectively registered).

Cariprazine Treatment of Bipolar Depression: A Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Phase 3 Study

OBJECTIVE

Cariprazine, a dopamine D₃/D₂ and 5-HT_1A receptor partial agonist, was found to be effective in treating bipolar I depression in a previous phase 2 study. This phase 3 study further assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cariprazine in bipolar I depression.

METHODS

In a double-blind placebo-controlled study, adult participants (18-65 years old) who met DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder and a current depressive episode were randomly assigned to receive placebo (N=158) or cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day (N=157) or 3.0 mg/day (N=165). The primary and secondary efficacy parameters were changes from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score and Clinical Global Impressions severity (CGI-S) score, respectively. Least squares mean differences were estimated using a mixed model for repeated measures, and p values were adjusted for multiplicity.

RESULTS

Both dosages of cariprazine were significantly more effective than placebo in improving depressive symptoms (reducing MADRS total score); the least squares mean differences were -2.5 (95% CI=-4.6, -0.4) for cariprazine at 1.5 mg/day and -3.0 (95% CI=-5.1, -0.9) for cariprazine at 3.0 mg/day. Both cariprazine dosages were associated with lower CGI-S scores compared with placebo, but the differences did not reach statistical significance after adjustment for multiplicity (least squares mean difference, -0.2 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 1.5 mg/day group and -0.3 [95% CI=-0.5, 0.0] for the 3.0 mg/day group). Common treatment-emergent adverse events (in at least 5% of participants in either cariprazine treatment group and twice the rate of the placebo group) were nausea, akathisia, dizziness, and sedation. Mean changes in weight and metabolic parameters were relatively small and comparable across groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Cariprazine, at both 1.5 mg/day and 3.0 mg/day, was effective, generally well tolerated, and relatively safe in reducing depressive symptoms in adults with bipolar I depression.