Twenty-year medication use trends in first-episode bipolar disorder

Mapping review of register-based cohort studies of bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Register-based cohorts allow us to better understand bipolar disorder over a life course. They are inclusive and their long-term data collection provides a longer scope than most clinical trials. This mapping review provides an overview of register-based cohort studies of bipolar disorder to inform researchers of the strengths and limitations to this body of research and identify gaps for future research.

METHODS

A systematic search was performed of Medline, EMBASE, and PsycINFO databases. Cohort studies were included if they focused on bipolar disorder and had a minimum of 1 year of longitudinal data. Studies needed to be from databases that monitor the whole state or national population. A descriptive analysis of the studies' populations and methodology provides an overview of this field of study and identifies evidence gaps.

RESULTS

A hundred and forty-six studies were included. The majority were from databases in Taiwan (n = 63), Denmark (n = 38), Sweden (n = 23), and Finland (n = 11). Forty-eight studies focused on aetiological questions. Sixty prognostic studies identified cohorts with bipolar disorder and described the impact of the illness by considering comorbidity, prescribing patterns, social functioning, and mortality. Thirty-six treatment studies focused on the efficacy and adverse effects of pharmaceuticals and ECT. No studies focused on psychological treatments.

CONCLUSION

Bipolar disorder research should include register-based cohorts with greater geopolitical and cultural diversity. Custodians of health registers should consider how non-pharmaceutical interventions such as psychotherapy are captured. Register-based cohorts investigating treatments of bipolar disorder should consider long-term social outcomes alongside the usual clinical outcomes.

Twenty-Three Years of Declining Lithium Use: Analysis of a Pharmacoepidemiological Dataset from German-Speaking Countries

INTRODUCTION

Pharmacoepidemiological data suggest that lithium prescriptions for bipolar disorder are gradually decreasing, with less attention having been paid to other indications.

METHODS

We examined lithium prescriptions between 1994 and 2017 in data provided by the Drug Safety in Psychiatry Program AMSP, including psychiatric hospitals in Germany, Austria and Switzerland. We compared lithium use for different diagnoses before and after 2001 and in three periods (T1: 1994-2001, T2: 2002-2009, and T3: 2010-2017).

RESULTS

In a total of 158,384 adult inpatients (54% female, mean age 47.4±17.0 years), we observed a statistically significant decrease in lithium prescriptions between 1994-2000 and 2001-2017 in patients with schizophrenia spectrum disorder from 7.7% to 5.1% and in patients with affective disorders from 16.8% to 9.6%. Decreases in use were also observed for diagnostic subgroups: schizoaffective disorder (ICD-10 F25: 27.8% to 17.4%), bipolar disorder (F31: 41.3% to 31%), depressive episode (F32: 8.1% to 3.4%), recurrent depression (F33: 17.9% to 7.5%, all: p<0.001) and emotionally unstable (borderline) personality disorder (6.3% to 3.9%, p=0.01). The results in T1 vs. T2 vs. T3 were for F25: 26.7% vs. 18.2% vs. 16.2%, F32: 7.7% vs. 4.2% vs. 2.7%, F33: 17.2% vs. 8.6% vs. 6.6% and for F31: 40.8% vs. 31.7% vs 30.0%, i. e. there was no further decrease for lithium use in bipolar disorder after 2002. Lithium's main psychotropic co-medications were quetiapine (21.1%), lorazepam (20.6%), and olanzapine (15.2%).

DISCUSSION

In inpatients, the use of lithium has decreased in patients with bipolar disorder and also with various other psychiatric diagnoses.

The efficacy of lamotrigine in bipolar disorder: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To provide up-to-date clinical guidance on the efficacy of lamotrigine in bipolar disorder (BD).

METHODS

Eligible studies were identified during a systematic literature search according to PRISMA-guidelines. We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and cohort studies that quantitatively assessed lamotrigine's efficacy in BD. We divided the included studies into three groups: 1. acute treatment of depression, 2. acute treatment of mania and hypomania, and 3. maintenance treatment. Analyses were stratified by control group (placebo vs active comparator) and treatment strategy (monotherapy vs add-on treatment).

RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs (n = 1166 lamotrigine users) and 20 cohort studies (n = 11,141 lamotrigine users). Twenty-four of these studies were included in meta-analyses. During depressive episodes, greater decreases in depressive symptomatology were associated with initiation of lamotrigine as add-on treatment than with placebo (SMD -0.30 [95% CI = -0.51, -0.10], df = 3, p = 0.004). Decreases in depressive symptomatology did not differ significantly between lamotrigine and the active comparator (SMD -0.28 [95% CI = -1.06, 0.50], df = 3, p = 0.488). As a maintenance treatment, lamotrigine was associated with a significantly lower relapse/recurrence rate than placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.84 [95% CI = 0.71, 0.99], df = 2, p = 0.037). Relapse/recurrence rates did not differ significantly between lamotrigine and lithium (RR 1.06 [95% CI = 0.89, 1.25], df = 2, p = 0.513). A qualitative assessment of high-quality register-based studies found that lamotrigine was associated with lower hospital admission rates than other commonly used treatment regimes.

CONCLUSIONS

There is substantial evidence for the efficacy of lamotrigine in BD, specifically as add-on treatment during acute depressive episodes and as maintenance treatment for preventing relapse and recurrence.

Lithium, the gold standard drug for bipolar disorder: analysis of current clinical studies

Lithium is the gold standard drug in the treatment of bipolar disorder. Despite increasing scientific interest, relatively few patients with bipolar disorder receive lithium therapy. Lithium is the only drug that is effective in the prophylaxis of manic, depressive, and suicidal symptoms. Lithium therapy is also associated with a variety of adverse drug reactions and the need for therapeutic drug monitoring. Numerous studies have focussed on the efficacy and safety of both lithium-monotherapy and lithium-add-on therapy. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic overview of clinical studies on lithium therapy for bipolar disorder from the last 7 years and to present a critical analysis of these studies. The results provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of lithium therapy for bipolar disorder and thus improve the pharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder. A total of 59 studies were analysed using various analysis parameters. The studies were also categorised into different subgroups. These are lithium-monotherapy, lithium vs. placebo/drug, and lithium + adjunctive therapy. The majority of the studies (N = 20) had a duration of only 3-8 weeks. Only 13 studies lasted for > 40 weeks. Lithium was superior to aripiprazole, valproic acid, and quetiapine in terms of improving manic symptoms. Lithium therapy resulted in a lower relapse rate compared to valproic acid therapy. Lithium was more neuroprotectively effective than quetiapine. Fourteen of the 22 add-on therapies to lithium showed a predominantly positive effect on the treatment outcome compared to lithium-monotherapy. Only the add-on therapy with sertraline led to a higher rate of study discontinuations than lithium-monotherapy. Lithium is a safe and effective treatment option for children. However, risperidone and quetiapine were superior to lithium in some aspects, which is why these drugs should be considered as an alternative treatment option for children. Collectively, current clinical studies highlight the relevance of lithium in the treatment of bipolar disorder.

Areas of interest and sentiment analysis towards second generation antipsychotics, lithium and mood stabilizing anticonvulsants: Unsupervised analysis using Twitter

BACKGROUND

Severe mental disorders like Schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders (SRD) or Bipolar Disorder (BD) require pharmacological treatment for relapse prevention and quality of life improvement. Yet, treatment adherence is a challenge, partly due to patients' attitudes and beliefs towards their medication. Social media listening offers insights into patient experiences and preferences, particularly in severe mental disorders.

METHODS

All tweets posted between 2008 and 2022 mentioning the names of the main drugs used in SRD and BD were analyzed using advanced artificial intelligence techniques such as machine learning, and deep learning, along with natural language processing.

RESULTS

In this 15-year study analyzing 893,289 tweets, second generation antipsychotics received more mentions in English tweets, whereas mood stabilizers received more tweets in Spanish. English tweets about economic and legal aspects displayed negative emotions, while Spanish tweets seeking advice showed surprise. Moreover, a recurring theme in Spanish tweets was the shortage of medications, evoking feelings of anger among users.

LIMITATIONS

This study's analysis of Twitter data, while insightful, may not fully capture the nuances of discussions due to the platform's brevity. Additionally, the wide therapeutic use of the studied drugs, complicates the isolation of disorder-specific discourse. Only English and Spanish tweets were examined, limiting the cultural breadth of the findings.

CONCLUSION

This study emphasizes the importance of social media research in understanding user perceptions of SRD and BD treatments. The results provide valuable insights for clinicians when considering how patients and the general public view and communicate about these treatments in the digital environment.

Ten-Year Trends in Lithium Prescribing in Alberta, Canada

AIMS

Despite lithium's clinical efficacy, it is commonly thought that its use is declining. The objective of this study is to describe the new and prevalent lithium users as well as rates of discontinuation of lithium use over a 10-year period.

METHODS

This study used provincial administrative health data from Alberta, Canada between January 1, 2009 and December 31, 2018. Lithium prescriptions were identified within the Pharmaceutical Information Network database. Total and subgroup specific frequencies of new and prevalent lithium use were determined over the 10-year study period. Lithium discontinuation was also estimated through survival analysis.

RESULTS

Between the calendar years of 2009 and 2018, 580,873 lithium prescriptions were dispensed in Alberta to 14,008 patients. The total number of new and prevalent lithium users appears to be decreasing over the 10-year timeframe, although the decline may have stopped or reversed in the latter years of the study period. Prevalent use of lithium was lowest among individuals between the ages of 18-24 years while the highest number of prevalent users were in the 50-64 age group, particularly among females. New lithium use was lowest amongst those 65 years and older. More than 60% (8,636) of patients prescribed lithium, discontinued use during the study timeframe. Lithium users between ages of 18-24 years were at the highest risk of discontinuations.

CONCLUSIONS

Rather than a general decline in prescribing, trends in lithium use are dependent on age and sex. Further, the period soon after lithium initiation appears to be a key time period in which many lithium trials are abandoned. Detailed studies using primary data collection are needed to confirm and further explore these findings. These population-based results not only confirm a decline in lithium use, but also suggest that this may have stopped or even reversed. Population-based data on discontinuation pinpoint the period soon after initiation as the time when trials are most often discontinued.

Facts and myths about the use of lithium for bipolar disorder in routine clinical practice: an expert consensus paper

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is one of the most burdensome severe mental disorders, characterized by high levels of personal and social disability. Patients often need an integrated pharmacological and non-pharmacological approach. Lithium is one of the most effective treatments available not only in psychiatry, but in the whole medicine, and its clinical efficacy is superior to that of other mood stabilizers. However, a declining trend on lithium prescriptions has been observed worldwide in the last 20 years, supporting the notion that lithium is a 'forgotten drug' and highlighting that the majority of patients with bipolar disorder are missing out the best available pharmacological option. Based on such premises, a narrative review has been carried out on the most common "misconceptions" and "stereotypes" associated with lithium treatment; we also provide a list of "good reasons" for using lithium in ordinary clinical practice to overcome those false myths.

MAIN TEXT

A narrative search of the available literature has been performed entering the following keywords: "bipolar disorder", "lithium", "myth", "mythology", "pharmacological treatment", and "misunderstanding". The most common false myths have been critically revised and the following statements have been proposed: (1) Lithium should represent the first choice for the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder; (2) lithium treatment is effective in different patients' groups suffering from bipolar disorder; (3) Drug-drug interaction risk can be easily managed during lithium treatment; (4) The optimal management of lithium treatment includes periodical laboratory tests; (5) Slow-release lithium formulation has advantages compared to immediate release formulation; (6) Lithium treatment has antisuicidal properties; (7) Lithium can be carefully managed during pregnancy.

CONCLUSIONS

In recent years, a discrepancy between evidence-based recommendations and clinical practice in using lithium treatment for patients with bipolar disorder has been highlighted. It is time to disseminate clear and unbiased information on the clinical efficacy, effectiveness, tolerability and easiness to use of lithium treatment in patients with bipolar disorder. It is necessary to reinvigorate the clinical and academic discussion about the efficacy of lithium, to counteract the decreasing prescription trend of one of the most effective drugs available in the whole medicine.

Real-world use of pharmacological treatments for incident bipolar disorder: A Finnish nationwide cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacotherapy remains crucial for treating bipolar disorder (BD), but knowledge on the treatments actually used by newly diagnosed patients in real-world settings is sparse.

METHODS

Individuals newly diagnosed with BD during 1996-2018, aged 15-65 years, were identified from national Finnish registers. The patients' use of different drug classes (mood stabilizers, antipsychotics and antidepressants) or combinations of these drug classes were followed from initial pharmacotherapy (first line) after BD diagnosis until the fifth line of treatment or until the two-year follow-up time ended. Clinical and sociodemographic factors associated with antidepressants-only as the first treatment line were assessed with logistic regression.

RESULTS

82.6 % of all patients used BD medication during the follow-up. 33.9 % had antidepressants-only as the first, 22.9 % as the second and 19.7 % as the third treatment line. Use of combinations of mood stabilizers, antipsychotics and antidepressants increased by successive treatment lines. Factors associated with antidepressants-only as the first treatment line included older age (>45 years aOR 2.20, 95% CI: 2.01-2.40, 25-45 years: 1.55, 1.42-1.68, compared with those aged <25), diabetes (1.35, 1.17-1.55) and female sex (1.29, 1.21-1.37). BD diagnosis registered in 2016-2018 (0.48, 0.42-0.55) and substance abuse (0.77, 0.71-0.83) were associated with decreased odds.

LIMITATIONS

Due to the register-based nature of this study, not all potentially important clinical factors influencing medication use could be controlled for.

CONCLUSIONS

A large proportion of patients with bipolar disorder are not treated according to treatment guidelines, as use of antidepressants alone is common. Reasons for not following evidence-based recommendations need to be further researched.

Use of antipsychotics and antidepressants in first-episode psychotic depression: A nationwide register-based study

BACKGROUND

According to guidelines, psychotic depression should be treated with both antipsychotics and antidepressants, but current practice is largely unknown. We investigated the prevalence of antipsychotic and antidepressant use in first-episode psychotic depression and factors related to antipsychotic use after the diagnosis.

METHODS

We identified individuals aged 16-65 with a first-episode diagnosis of psychotic depression (ICD-10 codes F32.3, F33.3) from nationwide data linkage of Finnish healthcare and population registers during 2000-2018. Point prevalence was measured as 2-week time windows every 3 months, investigating whether the individual had a modeled drug use period ongoing during the window or not, censoring to death and end of data linkage.

RESULTS

The study population included 18,490 individuals (58.0% women; mean age 39.9 years, standard deviation 14.7). The prevalence of use for antidepressants (75.0%), antipsychotics (56.4%), and both (50.0%) were highest at 3 months after the diagnosis. The prevalence declined to 51.8%, 34.1%, and 28.7%, respectively, at 3 years after the diagnosis. In a logistic regression analysis, younger age (adjusted odds ratio < 25 vs. ≥55, 0.82 [95% confidence interval 0.73-0.91]), eating disorders (0.78 [0.66-0.92]), substance use disorders (0.80 [0.73-0.87]), and occupational inactivity (0.80 [0.73-0.87]) were associated with decreased odds of using antipsychotics at 3 months after diagnosis. Increased odds were found for diagnosis from inpatient care (1.74 [1.62-1.86]), and later year of cohort entry (2010-2014 vs. 2000-2004, 1.56 [1.42-1.70]).

CONCLUSION

At most, half of the individuals with newly diagnosed psychotic depression used both antidepressants and antipsychotics. This likely has a negative impact on treatment success.

Lithium-Induced Arginine Vasopressin Resistance (AVP-R): A Case of Chronic Exposure to Lithium

Lithium salts (lithium) is a psychotropic drug widely used as a pharmacological option in managing bipolar disorder. Regular monitoring of serum levels is necessary due to the narrow therapeutic range of lithium. Typically, the diagnosis of lithium intoxication is based on the presence of elevated plasma levels. Nevertheless, poisoning can ensue from either acute ingestion or chronic use, even in patients with normal plasma levels. The utilization of lithium has been decreasing due to its potential for multiorgan toxicity. Lithium accumulation in renal distal tubular cells is a prevalent cause of acquired arginine vasopressin resistance (AVP-R), previously known as nephrogenic diabetes insipidus (DI). Some patients might also experience neurologic persistent symptoms after plasma level normalization, a condition known as the syndrome of irreversible lithium-effectuated neurotoxicity (SILENT). We present a case report of acquired AVP-R following prolonged lithium use. This case report aims to increase awareness, particularly among those who may be unfamiliar with the use of lithium and its associated adverse reactions. In addition, it seeks to highlight the dissociation between clinical manifestations and lithium plasma levels, emphasizing the need for careful evaluation in patients receiving lithium treatment.

Twenty-year medication use trends in first-episode bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

To study the medication use patterns in patients newly diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) in Finland during the past 20 years.

METHODS

All persons diagnosed with BD between 1996 and 2018, aged 16-65 years, with no previous BD diagnosis were identified from nationwide Finnish registers (N = 26,395). The point prevalences of medication use were observed up until 5 years after the first diagnosis. Five sub-cohorts according to calendar year of first diagnosis were also formed and the prevalence of medication use was compared between sub-cohorts 3 months after diagnosis. Medication data were modeled with the PRE2DUP-method using dispensing data.

RESULTS

The prevalence of overall medication use declined during the 5-year follow-up period in the total cohort. The highest prevalence of use was seen 3 months after diagnosis for the three main medication classes-antidepressants (40.8%), antipsychotics (30.8%) and mood stabilizers (29.2%). The prevalence of lithium use varied between 5.9% and 6.5% during the 5 years in the total cohort, and the lowest prevalence of use at 3 months was seen in sub-cohort diagnosed in 2016-2018 (4.1%) versus 12.1% in 1996-2000 sub-cohort. The prevalence of benzodiazepine use was between 12.4% and 13.5% and the prevalence of Z-drugs was between 7.3% and 7.9% during the 5 years. The prevalence of long-acting injectable antipsychotic (LAI) use was the highest in patients diagnosed in 2016-2018, although still only 0.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

(i) The use of antidepressants is too prevalent, (ii) the use of lithium is declining and needs to be increased, and (iii) LAIs are markedly underutilized as compared to their oral counterparts.