Topiramate treatment of women with borderline personality disorder, part II: an open 18-month follow-up

Pharmacological interventions for people with borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Among people with a diagnosis of borderline personality disorder (BPD) who are engaged in clinical care, prescription rates of psychotropic medications are high, despite the fact that medication use is off-label as a treatment for BPD. Nevertheless, people with BPD often receive several psychotropic drugs at a time for sustained periods.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of pharmacological treatment for people with BPD.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, 14 other databases and four trials registers up to February 2022. We contacted researchers working in the field to ask for additional data from published and unpublished trials, and handsearched relevant journals. We did not restrict the search by year of publication, language or type of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials comparing pharmacological treatment to placebo, other pharmacologic treatments or a combination of pharmacologic treatments in people of all ages with a formal diagnosis of BPD. The primary outcomes were BPD symptom severity, self-harm, suicide-related outcomes, and psychosocial functioning. Secondary outcomes were individual BPD symptoms, depression, attrition and adverse events.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

At least two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data, assessed risk of bias using Cochrane's risk of bias tool and assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We performed data analysis using Review Manager 5 and quantified the statistical reliability of the data using Trial Sequential Analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 46 randomised controlled trials (2769 participants) in this review, 45 of which were eligible for quantitative analysis and comprised 2752 participants with BPD in total. This is 18 more trials than the 2010 review on this topic. Participants were predominantly female except for one trial that included men only. The mean age ranged from 16.2 to 39.7 years across the included trials. Twenty-nine different types of medications compared to placebo or other medications were included in the analyses. Seventeen trials were funded or partially funded by the pharmaceutical industry, 10 were funded by universities or research foundations, eight received no funding, and 11 had unclear funding. For all reported effect sizes, negative effect estimates indicate beneficial effects by active medication. Compared with placebo, no difference in effects were observed on any of the primary outcomes at the end of treatment for any medication. Compared with placebo, medication may have little to no effect on BPD symptom severity, although the evidence is of very low certainty (antipsychotics: SMD -0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.45 to 0.08; 8 trials, 951 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.65 to 1.18; 2 trials, 87 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.57; 4 trials, 265 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on self-harm, indicating little to no effect (antipsychotics: RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.15 to 2.84; 2 trials, 76 participants; antidepressants: MD 0.45 points on the Overt Aggression Scale-Modified-Self-Injury item (0-5 points), 95% CI -10.55 to 11.45; 1 trial, 20 participants; mood stabilisers: RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.48; 1 trial, 276 participants). The evidence is also very uncertain about the effect of medication compared with placebo on suicide-related outcomes, with little to no effect (antipsychotics: SMD 0.05, 95 % CI -0.18 to 0.29; 7 trials, 854 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.26, 95% CI -1.62 to 1.09; 2 trials, 45 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.36, 95% CI -1.96 to 1.25; 2 trials, 44 participants). Very low-certainty evidence shows little to no difference between medication and placebo on psychosocial functioning (antipsychotics: SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.00; 7 trials, 904 participants; antidepressants: SMD -0.25, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.06; 4 trials, 161 participants; mood stabilisers: SMD -0.01, 95% CI -0.28 to 0.26; 2 trials, 214 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests that antipsychotics may slightly reduce interpersonal problems (SMD -0.21, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.08; 8 trials, 907 participants), and that mood stabilisers may result in a reduction in this outcome (SMD -0.58, 95% CI -1.14 to -0.02; 4 trials, 300 participants). Antidepressants may have little to no effect on interpersonal problems, but the corresponding evidence is very uncertain (SMD -0.07, 95% CI -0.69 to 0.55; 2 trials, 119 participants). The evidence is very uncertain about dropout rates compared with placebo by antipsychotics (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.38; 13 trials, 1216 participants). Low-certainty evidence suggests there may be no difference in dropout rates between antidepressants (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.76; 6 trials, 289 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15; 9 trials, 530 participants), compared to placebo. Reporting on adverse events was poor and mostly non-standardised. The available evidence on non-serious adverse events was of very low certainty for antipsychotics (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.90 to 1.29; 5 trials, 814 participants) and mood stabilisers (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.01; 1 trial, 276 participants). For antidepressants, no data on adverse events were identified.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review included 18 more trials than the 2010 version, so larger meta-analyses with more statistical power were feasible. We found mostly very low-certainty evidence that medication may result in no difference in any primary outcome. The rest of the secondary outcomes were inconclusive. Very limited data were available for serious adverse events. The review supports the continued understanding that no pharmacological therapy seems effective in specifically treating BPD pathology. More research is needed to understand the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms of BPD better. Also, more trials including comorbidities such as trauma-related disorders, major depression, substance use disorders, or eating disorders are needed. Additionally, more focus should be put on male and adolescent samples.

Psychopharmacologic treatment of borderline personality disorder

The best available evidence for psychopharmacologic treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) is outlined here. BPD is defined by disturbances in identity and interpersonal functioning, and patients report potential medication treatment targets such as impulsivity, aggression, transient psychotic and dissociative symptoms, and refractory affective instability Few randomized controlled trials of psychopharmacological treatments for BPD have been published recently, although multiple reviews have converged on the effectiveness of specific anticonvulsants, atypical antipsychotic agents, and omega-3 fatty acid supplementation. Stronger evidence exists for medication providing significant improvements in impulsive aggression than in affective or other interpersonal symptoms. Future research strategies will focus on the potential role of neuropeptide agents and medications with greater specificity for 2A serotonin receptors, as well as optimizing concomitant implementation of evidence-based psychotherapy and psychopharmacology, in order to improve BPD patients' overall functioning.

Modulation of ion channels in clinical psychopharmacology: adults and younger people

This review focuses on the use of Na(+), Ca(2+) and Cl(-) channel modulators in psychiatric disease. Drugs that modulate ion channels have been used in psychiatry for more than a century, and in this review we critically evaluate clinical research that reports the therapeutic effects of drugs acting on GABA(A), voltage-gated Na(+) and voltage-gated Ca(2+) channels in pediatric and adult patients. As in other fields, the evidence underpinning the use of medicines in younger people is far less robust than for adults. In addition, we discuss some current developments and highlight clinical disorders in which current molecules could be further tested. Notable success stories, such as benzodiazepines (in sleep and anxiety disorders) and antiepileptics (in bipolar disorder), have been the result of serendipitous discoveries or refinements of serendipitous discoveries, as in all other major treatments in psychiatry. Genomic, high-throughput screening and molecular pharmacology discoveries may, however, guide further developments in the future. This could include increased research in promising targets that have been perceived as commercially risky, such as selective α-subunit GABA(A) receptors.

Clinical psychopharmacology of borderline personality disorder: an update on the available evidence in light of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - 5

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Clinical considerations for evidence-based treatment of borderline personality disorder (BPD) are outlined in the context of the best available evidence, discussed with reference to BPD traits currently identified in the upcoming Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders - 5 (DSM-5) revision. The DSM-5 will highlight refractory affective, interpersonal, and identity symptoms in BPD as potential treatment targets. In addition to providing a framework for clinical decision-making, future research strategies will also focus on neurotransmitter systems of greater relevance to understanding overall personality functioning.

RECENT FINDINGS

Although only a few randomized controlled trials of psychopharmacological treatments for BPD have been published recently, several meta-analyses and systematic reviews converge on the consensus effectiveness of lamotrigine, topiramate, valproate, aripiprazole, olanzapine, and omega-3 fatty acid supplementation. Stronger evidence exists for treating disinhibition and antagonism than negative affectivity, particularly interpersonal facets of such traits. In addition, basic research suggests a future role for modifying glutamatergic, opioid, and oxytocinergic neurotransmitter systems to treat BPD.

SUMMARY

Clinicians should utilize omega-3, anticonvulsants, and atypical antipsychotic agents in treating specific DSM-5 BPD traits, notably disinhibition, antagonism, and some aspects of negative affectivity. Future research will focus on normalizing opioid and oxytocin dysregulation, as an adjunct to evidence-based psychotherapy, in an effort to improve interpersonal functioning.

Evidence-based pharmacotherapy for personality disorders

Patients with personality disorders are prescribed psychotropic medications with greater frequency than almost any other diagnostic group. Prescribing practices in these populations are often based on anecdotal evidence rather than rigorous data. Although evidence-based psychotherapy remains an integral part of treatment, Axis II psychopathology is increasingly conceptualized according to neurobiological substrates that correspond to specific psychopharmacological strategies. We summarize the best available evidence regarding medication treatment of personality disordered patients and provide optimal strategies for evidence-based practice. Most available evidence is concentrated around borderline and schizotypal personality disorders, with some additional evidence concerning the treatment of avoidant and antisocial personality disorders. Although maladaptive personality symptoms respond to antidepressants, antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and other medications, evidence-based pharmacotherapy is most useful in treating circumscribed symptom domains and induces only partial improvement. Most available evidence supports use of medication in reducing impulsivity and aggression, characteristic of borderline and antisocial psychopathology. Efforts have also begun to reduce psychotic-like symptoms and improve cognitive deficits characteristic of schizotypy. Indirect evidence is also provided for psychopharmacological reduction of social anxiety central to avoidant personality disorder. Evidence-based practice requires attention to domains of expected clinical improvement associated with a medication, relative to the potential risks. The development of future rational pharmacotherapy will require increased understanding of the neurobiological underpinnings of personality disorders and their component dimensions. Increasing efforts to translate personality theory and social cognitive neuroscience into increasingly specific neurobiological substrates may provide more effective targets for pharmacotherapy.

Pharmacological interventions for borderline personality disorder

BACKGROUND

Drugs are widely used in borderline personality disorder (BPD) treatment, chosen because of properties known from other psychiatric disorders ("off-label use"), mostly targeting affective or impulsive symptom clusters.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of drug treatment in BPD patients.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched bibliographic databases according to the Cochrane Developmental, Psychosocial and Learning Problems Group strategy up to September 2009, reference lists of articles, and contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised studies comparing drug versus placebo, or drug versus drug(s) in BPD patients. Outcomes included total BPD severity, distinct BPD symptom facets according to DSM-IV criteria, associated psychopathology not specific to BPD, attrition and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors selected trials, assessed quality and extracted data, independently.

MAIN RESULTS

Twenty-eight trials involving a total of 1742 trial participants were included. First-generation antipsychotics (flupenthixol decanoate, haloperidol, thiothixene); second-generation antipsychotics (aripirazole, olanzapine, ziprasidone), mood stabilisers (carbamazepine, valproate semisodium, lamotrigine, topiramate), antidepressants (amitriptyline, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, phenelzine sulfate, mianserin), and dietary supplementation (omega-3 fatty acid) were tested. First-generation antipsychotics were subject to older trials, whereas recent studies focussed on second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilisers. Data were sparse for individual comparisons, indicating marginal effects for first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants.The findings were suggestive in supporting the use of second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, and omega-3 fatty acids, but require replication, since most effect estimates were based on single studies. The long-term use of these drugs has not been assessed.Adverse event data were scarce, except for olanzapine. There was a possible increase in self-harming behaviour, significant weight gain, sedation and changes in haemogram parameters with olanzapine. A significant decrease in body weight was observed with topiramate treatment. All drugs were well tolerated in terms of attrition.Direct drug comparisons comprised two first-generation antipsychotics (loxapine versus chlorpromazine), first-generation antipsychotic against antidepressant (haloperidol versus amitriptyline; haloperidol versus phenelzine sulfate), and second-generation antipsychotic against antidepressant (olanzapine versus fluoxetine). Data indicated better outcomes for phenelzine sulfate but no significant differences in the other comparisons, except olanzapine which showed more weight gain and sedation than fluoxetine. The only trial testing single versus combined drug treatment (olanzapine versus olanzapine plus fluoxetine; fluoxetine versus fluoxetine plus olanzapine) yielded no significant differences in outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence indicates some beneficial effects with second-generation antipsychotics, mood stabilisers, and dietary supplementation by omega-3 fatty acids. However, these are mostly based on single study effect estimates. Antidepressants are not widely supported for BPD treatment, but may be helpful in the presence of comorbid conditions. Total BPD severity was not significantly influenced by any drug. No promising results are available for the core BPD symptoms of chronic feelings of emptiness, identity disturbance and abandonment. Conclusions have to be drawn carefully in the light of several limitations of the RCT evidence that constrain applicability to everyday clinical settings (among others, patients' characteristics and duration of interventions and observation periods).