Quetiapine monotherapy in bipolar II depression: combined data from four large, randomized studies

Practice Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder by the JSMD (Japanese Society of Mood Disorders)

The Japanese Society of Mood Disorders (JSMD) published treatment guidelines of bipolar disorder in 2011. The present guidelines incorporating new findings were developed to comply to the guidelines of the National Academy of Medicine (NAM) by utilizing systematic reviews and meta-analysis and taking patient and family opinions as well as insights from multiple professional fields into account. They support combination therapy using mood stabilizers and second-generation antipsychotics in many aspects. They also have limitations, including the grouping of mood stabilizers and second-generation antipsychotics when meta-analysis was performed despite their distinct properties, due to the scarcity of drug-specific evidence. Despite the limitations, these guidelines provide clinical decision support for psychiatrists in Japan.

Diagnosis and management of bipolar disorders

Bipolar disorders (BDs) are recurrent and sometimes chronic disorders of mood that affect around 2% of the world's population and encompass a spectrum between severe elevated and excitable mood states (mania) to the dysphoria, low energy, and despondency of depressive episodes. The illness commonly starts in young adults and is a leading cause of disability and premature mortality. The clinical manifestations of bipolar disorder can be markedly varied between and within individuals across their lifespan. Early diagnosis is challenging and misdiagnoses are frequent, potentially resulting in missed early intervention and increasing the risk of iatrogenic harm. Over 15 approved treatments exist for the various phases of bipolar disorder, but outcomes are often suboptimal owing to insufficient efficacy, side effects, or lack of availability. Lithium, the first approved treatment for bipolar disorder, continues to be the most effective drug overall, although full remission is only seen in a subset of patients. Newer atypical antipsychotics are increasingly being found to be effective in the treatment of bipolar depression; however, their long term tolerability and safety are uncertain. For many with bipolar disorder, combination therapy and adjunctive psychotherapy might be necessary to treat symptoms across different phases of illness. Several classes of medications exist for treating bipolar disorder but predicting which medication is likely to be most effective or tolerable is not yet possible. As pathophysiological insights into the causes of bipolar disorders are revealed, a new era of targeted treatments aimed at causal mechanisms, be they pharmacological or psychosocial, will hopefully be developed. For the time being, however, clinical judgment, shared decision making, and empirical follow-up remain essential elements of clinical care. This review provides an overview of the clinical features, diagnostic subtypes, and major treatment modalities available to treat people with bipolar disorder, highlighting recent advances and ongoing therapeutic challenges.

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.

Valproate is associated with early decrease of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in the psychiatric population

Few studies have evaluated the influence of valproate on the deterioration of the lipid profile in psychiatric patients. This observational study aimed to compare the evolution of metabolic parameters in a sample of adult patients starting valproate (n = 39) with a control group (n = 39) of patients starting aripiprazole, a drug associated with a low risk of metabolic deterioration. Data were obtained from a prospective study including psychiatric patients with metabolic parameters monitored during the first year of treatment. During the first month of treatment with valproate (median: 31 days [IQR: 25-36]), mean body mass index increased significantly (from 24.8 kg/m² at baseline to 25.2 kg/m² after one month; P = .03) and mean HDL-C levels decreased significantly (from 1.39 mmol/L to 1.27 mmol/L; P = .02). In comparison, these metabolic variables remained stable during the first month of treatment with aripiprazole. The proportion of patients with early (ie during the first month of treatment) HDL-C decrease of ≥ 5% was significantly higher under valproate (54%) than aripiprazole (15%) treatment (P < .001). These findings remind the importance of a prospective metabolic monitoring in patients who initiate valproate treatment. Further research should be conducted on larger samples and should focus on finding effective interventions to prevent such metabolic adverse effects.

Efficacy and Safety of Quetiapine for Pediatric Bipolar Depression: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials

Quetiapine is a second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of schizophrenia, mania, and aggression in children and adolescents. It is also commonly used as an off-label medication to treat children and adolescents with bipolar depression, although the FDA has not approved quetiapine for this purpose. We conducted a systematic review of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) using the MEDLINE database and included two studies that met our inclusion criteria. Both RCTs were eight-week short-term studies that involved patients of 10-18 years of age with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders-IV (DSM-IV) diagnosis of bipolar disorder, depressed type. The mean difference in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score and the response and remission rates in the quetiapine group were not statistically significant when compared to the placebo group. A high placebo response rate proved that quetiapine was no better than the placebo in treating pediatric bipolar depression. Quetiapine proved to be a relatively safe drug with the most common side effects being headache, somnolence, gastric upset, and weight gain. There was a significant increase in triglyceride levels, but no other metabolic effects were reported. This calls for future studies with larger sample sizes and improved methodology to explore the efficacy of quetiapine and other SGAs for the management of pediatric bipolar depression.

Psychotherapy Alone and Combined With Medication as Treatments for Bipolar II Depression: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Bipolar II disorder (BP-II) is associated with marked morbidity and mortality. Quetiapine, the treatment with greatest evidence for efficacy in BP-II depression, is associated with metabolic burden. Psychotherapy, a treatment with few side effects, has not been systematically evaluated in BP-II. This study compared psychotherapy plus placebo to psychotherapy plus pharmacotherapy as treatments for BP-II depression.

METHODS

From 2010 to 2015, unmedicated adults (n = 92) with DSM-IV-TR BP-II depression were randomly assigned to weekly sessions of Interpersonal and Social Rhythm Therapy (IPSRT) plus placebo or IPSRT plus quetiapine and followed for 20 weeks.

RESULTS

For primary outcomes, IPSRT + quetiapine yielded significantly faster improvement on 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (F₁,₁₁₅.₄ = 3.924, P = .048) and greater improvement on Young Mania Rating Scale (F₅₈.₅ = 4.242, P = .044) scores. Both groups, however, improved significantly over time with comparable response rates (≥ 50% reduction in depression scores): 67.4% (62/92) in the entire sample, with no between-group differences. Those randomly assigned to their preferred treatment were 4.5 times more likely to respond (OR = 4.48, 95% CI = 1.20-16.77, P = .026). IPSRT + quetiapine assignment was associated with significantly higher body mass index over time (F₆₇.₉₆ = 6.671, P = .012) and rates of dry mouth (79% v. 58%; χ² = 4.0, P = .046) and a trend toward more complaints of oversedation (100% vs 92%; χ² = 3.4, P = .063).

CONCLUSIONS

IPSRT plus quetiapine resulted in greater symptomatic improvement but also more side effects than IPSRT alone. A subset of participants improved with IPSRT alone, although absence of an inactive comparator limits interpretation of this finding. Receipt of preferred treatment was associated with better outcomes. Harms, benefits, and preferences should be considered when recommending treatments for BP-II depression.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01133821.

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

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

Efficacy of bright light therapy in bipolar depression

For 30 years, bright light therapy (BLT) has been considered as an effective, well-tolerated treatment for seasonal affective disorder (SAD). Because of low response rates, new treatment strategies are needed for bipolar depression (BD), which resembles SAD in certain respects. Few placebo-controlled studies of BLT efficacy have been carried out for BD. Accordingly, this study evaluates the efficacy and safety of BLT as an add-on treatment for BD. Thirty-two BD outpatients were randomly assigned to BLT (10000lx) or dim light (DL, < 500lx). During a two-week period, light was administered each morning for 30min. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression and the Montgomery-Ǻsberg Depression Rating Scale assessed clinical outcome, and the UKU Side Effects Rating Scale evaluated side effects. No significant difference was observed in baseline depression scores in the two groups. Response rates for BLT and DL were 81% and 19%, and remission rates were 44% and 12.5%, respectively. Analyses showed statistically significant reductions in depression scores for the BLT group compared with the DL group on all scales. Side effects were similar in both groups, with headache as the most common side effect. The results suggest that BLT is an effective and safe add-on treatment for BD.

Efficacy of quetiapine XR vs. placebo as concomitant treatment to mood stabilizers in the control of subthreshold symptoms of bipolar disorder: Results from a pilot, randomized controlled trial

Patients with bipolar disorder (BD) do not always achieve full remission between episodes. Subthreshold symptoms (depressive, manic or mixed) represent a major cause of relapse and disability in these patients. Immediate release (IR) and extended release (XR) formulations of quetiapine are both indicated for short and long-term treatment of BD. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine XR vs placebo in subthreshold symptomatology when added to previous mood stabilizer treatment. A pilot phase IIIB, multicentre, prospective, placebo controlled, randomized, double blinded study of 12 weeks follow-up was performed (NCT01197846). Patients were randomized to quetiapine XR 300mg or placebo once daily. The primary outcome was the mean change between quetiapine XR and placebo from baseline to study endpoint (week 6) in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Quetiapine XR 300mg (n=16) significantly improved depressive subthreshold symptoms compared with placebo (n=16) after 6 weeks (P=0.021). Early response (reduction of at least the 20% of the MADRS total score) and remission rate (reduction in MADRS total score <8 and YMRS<8) did not show differences between groups. Quetiapine XR did not show superiority vs placebo when evaluating subthreshold manic symptoms, instead it was superior when evaluating functioning (GAF score) in BD type I patients (P=0.005). The most common adverse events were somnolence (9.1%), increased appetite, dry mouth and dizziness (6.8%). Quetiapine XR 300mg once daily was significantly more effective than placebo in depressive subthreshold symptoms. Adverse events were consistent with the known side effects of quetiapine.

Differential prevalence and demographic and clinical correlates of second-generation antipsychotic use in bipolar I versus bipolar II disorder

AIMS

To assess second-generation antipsychotic (SGA) use, demographics, and clinical correlates in patients with bipolar I disorder (BDI) versus bipolar II disorder (BDII).

METHODS

Stanford Bipolar Disorder (BD) Clinic outpatients enrolled during 2000-2011 were assessed with the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for BD (STEP-BD) Affective Disorders Evaluation. Current SGA use, demographics, and clinical correlates were assessed for BDI versus BDII.

RESULTS

Among 503 BD outpatients, in BDI versus BDII, SGA use was more than twice as common (44.0% versus 21.2%), and doses were approximately twice as high. BDI patients taking (N = 107) versus not taking (N = 136) SGAs less often had current full time employment and college degree; and more often had lifetime psychiatric hospitalization, current depression, and current complex pharmacotherapy, and had a higher mean current Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Version Overall Severity score, and these persisted significantly after covarying for employment and education. Prior psychiatric hospitalization was the most robust correlate of SGA use in BDI patients. In contrast, these demographic and clinical correlates of SGA use were not statistically significant among patients with BDII, although BDII (but not BDI) patients taking (N = 55) versus not taking (N = 205) SGAs were more likely to have current mood stabilizer use (67.3% versus 51.7%).

LIMITATIONS

American tertiary bipolar disorder clinic referral sample, cross-sectional design.

CONCLUSIONS

Current SGA use was robustly associated with prior psychiatric hospitalization in BDI and to a more limited extent with current mood stabilizer use in BDII. SGA use associations with other unfavorable illness characteristics in BDI were less robust.

The Prevalence and Diagnostic Validity of Short-Duration Hypomanic Episodes and Major Depressive Episodes

Current diagnostic criteria for a hypomanic episode, as outlined in both the fourth and fifth editions of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV and DSM-5), require a minimum duration of four consecutive days of symptoms of mood elevation. The 4-day criterion for duration of hypomania has been challenged as arbitrary and lacking empirical support, with many arguing that shorter-duration hypomanic episodes are highly prevalent and that those experiencing these episodes are clinically more similar to patients with bipolar disorder than to those with unipolar major depressive disorder. We review the current evidence regarding the prevalence, diagnostic validity, and longitudinal illness correlates of shorter-duration hypomanic episodes and summarize the arguments for and against broadening the diagnostic criteria for hypomania to include shorter-duration variants. Accumulating findings suggest that patients with major depressive episodes and shorter-duration hypomanic episodes represent a complex clinical phenotype, perhaps best conceptualized as being on the continuum between those with unipolar depressive episodes alone and those with DSM-5-defined bipolar II disorder. Further investigation is warranted, ideally involving large prospective, controlled studies, to elucidate the diagnostic and treatment implications of depression with shorter-duration hypomanic episodes.

Treatment of bipolar disorder: Review of evidence regarding quetiapine and lithium

BACKGROUND

Lithium, the prototypical mood stabilizer, and quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic, are widely used acute and maintenance pharmacotherapies for bipolar disorder. The Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE) study was the first comparative effectiveness assessment of lithium versus quetiapine (in combination with adjunctive personalized treatment), and found no overall significant differences in efficacy and safety/tolerability outcomes between lithium and quetiapine. Completion of Bipolar CHOICE offers a timely opportunity to review the evidence regarding lithium and quetiapine for bipolar disorder.

METHODS

Controlled clinical trials and real-world observational studies that included quetiapine and lithium as monotherapy or as combination therapy were identified by literature search. Selected studies were reviewed in detail.

RESULTS

Review of the available trials suggested comparable efficacy of quetiapine and lithium in acute mania, and possibly greater efficacy for quetiapine compared with lithium in acute bipolar depression and in prevention of recurrent (particularly depressive) episodes. Combination therapy including quetiapine and lithium was generally more effective than either agent alone in acute mania and bipolar maintenance, although adding lithium to quetiapine did not increase efficacy in acute bipolar depression. Safety data for quetiapine and lithium were consistent with the established profiles of the two treatments.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include those of the available efficacy and effectiveness trial data.

CONCLUSIONS

Quetiapine and lithium have overlapping but distinctive roles in different phases of bipolar disorder, and further studies of these agents (particularly in combination with one another) are warranted.

Bipolar II compared with bipolar I disorder: baseline characteristics and treatment response to quetiapine in a pooled analysis of five placebo-controlled clinical trials of acute bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

Bipolar I and II represent the most common and severe subtypes of bipolar disorder. Although bipolar I disorder is relatively well studied, the clinical characteristics and response to treatment of patients with bipolar II disorder are less well understood.

METHODS

To compare the severity and burden of illness of patients with bipolar II versus bipolar I disorder, baseline demographic, clinical, and quality of life data were examined in 1900 patients with bipolar I and 973 patients with bipolar II depression, who were enrolled in five similarly designed clinical placebo-controlled trials of quetiapine immediate-release and quetiapine extended-release. Acute (8 weeks) response to treatment was also compared by assessing rating scale scores, including Montgomery-Åsberg depression rating scale, Hamilton rating scale for anxiety, Young mania rating scale, and clinical global impression-severity scores, in the bipolar I and II populations in the same pooled database.

RESULTS

Patients with bipolar I and bipolar II depression were similar in demographics, baseline rating scale scores (depression, anxiety, mania, and quality of life), and mood episode histories. Symptom improvements in response to quetiapine were greater versus comparators (lithium, paroxetine, and placebo) at 4 and 8 weeks in both bipolar I and II patients. Patients with the bipolar II subtype initially showed slower responses to all treatments, but, by 8 weeks, attained similar symptom improvement as patients with bipolar I depression.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled analysis of five clinical trials of quetiapine demonstrated that patients with bipolar II depression have a similar burden of illness and quality of life to patients with bipolar I. Bipolar II patients consistently showed a slower response to treatments than bipolar I patients, but, after 8 weeks of treatment with quetiapine, symptom improvements were similar between bipolar I and II disorder subtypes.

Efficacy and Safety of Risperidone and Quetiapine in Adolescents With Bipolar II Disorder Comorbid With Conduct Disorder

Although a frequent co-occurrence between bipolar disorder (BD) and conduct disorder (CD) in youth has been frequently reported, data about pharmacological management are scarce and focused on BD type I. Second generation antipsychotics are frequently used in clinical practice, but no comparative studies are available. The aim of this exploratory study was to compare efficacy and safety of risperidone and quetiapine in a sample of adolescents presenting a BD type II comorbid with CD. Twenty-two patients diagnosed with a structured interview according to Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, (male/female ratio, 12/10; mean (SD) age 15.0 (1.4) years) were randomized in 2 treatment groups (quetiapine [n = 12] vs risperidone [n = 10]), treated with flexible doses, and followed up for 12 weeks. Efficacy measures assessed manic symptoms, aggression, anxiety, depression, global clinical severity, and impairment. Safety measures included body mass index, serum prolactin, extrapyramidal adverse effects, and electrocardiogram. At the end of the study, all patients improved in all efficacy measures. Both treatments showed similar efficacy in reducing manic symptoms and aggression. Quetiapine was more effective in improving anxiety and depressive symptoms. A change in body mass index was found, and in a post hoc analysis, it was significant only in the risperidone group. Prolactin significantly increased only in the risperidone group. In BD type II, CD comorbidity, quetiapine, or risperidone monotherapy may be effective and relatively safe, although the small sample size, the limited duration of the study, and the design (lack of a blind assessments and of a placebo group) make it difficult to draw definitive conclusions.

Use of quetiapine in children and adolescents

The atypical antipsychotic quetiapine has been used in different psychotic and non-psychotic disorders in children and adolescents in randomized clinical trials, open-label studies and chart reviews. Most of these studies suggest that quetiapine may be a promising agent with a potential for use in young patients. The aim of this paper is to critically review available literature on quetiapine in the treatment of children and adolescents with a variety of psychiatric disorders, including psychotic disorders, bipolar disorders (manic and depressive episodes), conduct disorder, autism spectrum disorder, Tourette's syndrome and personality disorders. Furthermore, we report on possible neurochemical pathways involved during treatment with quetiapine, and discuss some issues that are clinically relevant in daily practice, such as titration strategies, safety and tolerability, and monitoring possible side effects. Controlled studies support the short-term efficacy for treating psychosis, mania, and aggression within certain diagnostic categories. However, although quetiapine seems well tolerated in various pediatric populations during acute and intermediate treatments, and hyper-prolactinemia and extra-pyramidal side effects are consistently low among studies, weight gain and alterations in lipid profile need to be closely monitored. Furthermore, the distal benefit/risk ratio during long-term treatment remains to be determined.