Antidepressants in bipolar depression: much confusion, many questions, few answers

"A sense of the bigger picture:" A qualitative analysis of follow-up interviews with people with bipolar disorder who self-reported psilocybin use

OBJECTIVES

People with bipolar disorder (BD) spend more time depressed than manic/hypomanic, and depression is associated with greater impairments in psychosocial functioning and quality of life than mania/hypomania. Emerging evidence suggests psilocybin, the psychoactive compound in "magic mushrooms," is a promising treatment for unipolar depression. Clinical trials of psilocybin therapy have excluded people with BD as a precaution against possible adverse effects (e.g., mania). Our study centered the experiences of adults living with BD who consumed psilocybin-containing mushrooms, and aimed to (1) understand its subjective impacts on BD symptoms, (2) deepen understanding of Phase I survey results, and (3) elucidate specific contextual factors associated with adverse reactions in naturalistic settings.

METHODS

Following an international survey (Phase I), follow-up interviews were conducted with 15 respondents (Phase II) to further understand psilocybin use among adults with BD. As part of a larger mixed-methods explanatory sequential design study, reflexive thematic analysis was used to elaborate findings.

RESULTS

Three major themes containing sub-themes were developed. (1) Mental Health Improvements: (1.1) decreased impact and severity of depression, (1.2) increased emotion processing, (1.3) development of new perspectives, and (1.4) greater relaxation and sleep. (2) Undesired Mental Health Impacts: (2.1) changes in sleep, (2.2) increased mania severity, (2.3) hospitalization, and (2.4) distressing sensory experiences. (3) Salient Contextual Factors for psilocybin use included: (3.1) poly-substance use and psilocybin dose, (3.2) solo versus social experiences, and (3.3) pre-psilocybin sleep deprivation.

CONCLUSION

Our findings demonstrate both benefits and risks of psilocybin use in this population. Carefully designed clinical trials focused on safety and preliminary efficacy are warranted.

Antidepressants in Bipolar Depression: An Enduring Controversy

(Reprinted with permission from Int J Bipolar Discord (2018) 6:25).

Antidepressants in bipolar depression: an enduring controversy

The proper place and the optimal use of antidepressants in treating bipolar depression continues to be an area of great interest and greater controversy with passionate opinions more common than good studies. Even the handful of meta-analyses in the area disagree with each other. Overall, the evidence that antidepressants are effective in treating bipolar depression is weak. Additionally, many experts and clinicians worry greatly about the capacity of antidepressants to cause affective switching or mood destabilization. Yet, in short term controlled studies, with most patients also taking mood stabilizers, antidepressants are not associated with switches into mania/hypomania. Evidence of cycle acceleration with antidepressants primarily reflects treatment with older antidepressants, e.g., tricyclics. Similar evidence with modern antidepressants such as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) is lacking. The key questions should not be: are antidepressants effective in bipolar depression?; And: do antidepressants worsen the course of bipolar disorder? Rather, the question should be focused on subgroups: for which patients are antidepressants helpful and safe, and for which patients will they be harmful? Predictors of affective switching with antidepressants include: bipolar I disorder (vs. bipolar II), mixed features during depression, tricyclics vs. modern antidepressants, rapid cycling and possibly a history of drug abuse, especially stimulant abuse. Additionally, a number of recent studies have demonstrated both the safety and efficacy of antidepressant monotherapy in treating bipolar II depression. Finally, a subgroup of bipolar individuals need antidepressants in addition to mood stabilizers as part of an optimal maintenance treatment regimen.

Efficacy and safety of long-term antidepressant treatment for bipolar disorders - A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Efficacy and safety of long-term use of antidepressants (AD) in bipolar disorder (BD) patients remains highly controversial. Here we performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) exploring the efficacy and safety of long-term AD use in BD patients.

METHODS

English-written literature published in peer-reviewed journal was systematically searched from Pubmed, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO and Clinicaltrials.gov. Each database was searched from its first available time to August 31, 2016. Additional papers were searched from recent guidelines, expert consensus and systematic reviews by hand. RCTs exploring the efficacy and safety of long-term (≥4m) antidepressant treatment for patients with bipolar disorder were eligible. Two authors (HF, JL) independently extracted the data. Risk ratio (RR), number needed to treat (NNT) and/or number needed to harm (NNH) for new depressive episodes and new manic/hypomanic episodes were calculated. Subgroup analyses were performed based on treatment regimen (AD monotherapy or combined with MS), types of antidepressants, funding source, bipolar subtypes and treatment duration.

RESULTS

Eleven trials with 692 bipolar disorder patients were included in the meta-analysis. The risk of bias assessment demonstrated moderate bias risk. Antidepressants were superior to placebo in reducing new depressive episodes in bipolar disorders without increasing risk of new manic/hypomanic episodes either used as monotherapy or in combination with MS. Subgroup analyses revealed that greater benefit and lower risk may be achieved in BD II than in BD I. However, compared with MS monotherapy, AD monotherapy significantly increased the risk of affective switch with no improvement in prophylaxis of new depressive episodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Reduced new depressive episodes may be achieved by long-term AD treatment with no significantly increased risk of new manic/hypomanic episodes in BD, particularly in BD II. The elevated risk of affective switch of AD monotherapy compared with MS monotherapy may be contributed to the protective effect of MS in diminishing manic/hypomanic episodes. Further studies are needed to verify our findings.

Treatment implications of predominant polarity and the polarity index: a comprehensive review

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a serious and recurring condition that affects approximately 2.4% of the global population. About half of BD sufferers have an illness course characterized by either a manic or a depressive predominance. This predominant polarity in BD may be differentially associated with several clinical correlates. The concept of a polarity index (PI) has been recently proposed as an index of the antimanic versus antidepressive efficacy of various maintenance treatments for BD. Notwithstanding its potential clinical utility, predominant polarity was not included in the DSM-5 as a BD course specifier.

METHODS

Here we searched computerized databases for original clinical studies on the role of predominant polarity for selection of and response to pharmacological treatments for BD. Furthermore, we systematically searched the Pubmed database for maintenance randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for BD to determine the PI of the various pharmacological agents for BD.

RESULTS

We found support from naturalistic studies that bipolar patients with a predominantly depressive polarity are more likely to be treated with an antidepressive stabilization package, while BD patients with a manic-predominant polarity are more frequently treated with an antimanic stabilization package. Furthermore, predominantly manic BD patients received therapeutic regimens with a higher mean PI. The calculated PI varied from 0.4 (for lamotrigine) to 12.1 (for aripiprazole).

CONCLUSIONS

This review supports the clinical relevance of predominant polarity as a course specifier for BD. Future studies should investigate the role of baseline, predominant polarity as an outcome predictor of BD maintenance RCTs.

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) task force report on antidepressant use in bipolar disorders

OBJECTIVE

The risk-benefit profile of antidepressant medications in bipolar disorder is controversial. When conclusive evidence is lacking, expert consensus can guide treatment decisions. The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) convened a task force to seek consensus recommendations on the use of antidepressants in bipolar disorders.

METHOD

An expert task force iteratively developed consensus through serial consensus-based revisions using the Delphi method. Initial survey items were based on systematic review of the literature. Subsequent surveys included new or reworded items and items that needed to be rerated. This process resulted in the final ISBD Task Force clinical recommendations on antidepressant use in bipolar disorder.

RESULTS

There is striking incongruity between the wide use of and the weak evidence base for the efficacy and safety of antidepressant drugs in bipolar disorder. Few well-designed, long-term trials of prophylactic benefits have been conducted, and there is insufficient evidence for treatment benefits with antidepressants combined with mood stabilizers. A major concern is the risk for mood switch to hypomania, mania, and mixed states. Integrating the evidence and the experience of the task force members, a consensus was reached on 12 statements on the use of antidepressants in bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of limited data, the task force could not make broad statements endorsing antidepressant use but acknowledged that individual bipolar patients may benefit from antidepressants. Regarding safety, serotonin reuptake inhibitors and bupropion may have lower rates of manic switch than tricyclic and tetracyclic antidepressants and norepinephrine-serotonin reuptake inhibitors. The frequency and severity of antidepressant-associated mood elevations appear to be greater in bipolar I than bipolar II disorder. Hence, in bipolar I patients antidepressants should be prescribed only as an adjunct to mood-stabilizing medications.