Anhedonia difference between major depressive disorder and bipolar disorder II

Anhedonia in bipolar depression treated with ketamine

BACKGROUND

Bipolar depression is the major cause of morbidity in patients with bipolar disorder. It affects psychosocial functioning and markedly impairs occupational productivity. Anhedonia is one of the most debilitating symptoms of depression contributing to treatment resistance. It correlates with suicidality, low quality of life, social withdrawal, and poor treatment response. Currently, there is no approved treatment specifically targeting anhedonia. Emerging evidence suggests that ketamine possesses anti-anhedonic properties in individuals with depression.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this naturalistic open-label study was to investigate the effect of add-on ketamine treatment on anhedonia in treatment resistant bipolar depression.

METHODS

Our main interest was the change in patient-reported (Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Scale) and rater-based anhedonia measure (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale-anhedonia subscale). The secondary aim was to analyze the score change in three Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self Report (IDS-SR) domains: mood/cognition, anxiety/somatic, and sleep. Patients underwent assessments at several time points, including baseline, after the third, fifth, and seventh ketamine infusions. Additionally, a follow-up assessment was conducted 1 week following the final ketamine administration.

RESULTS

We found improvement in anhedonia symptoms according to both patient-reported and rater-based measures. The improvement in IDS-SR domains was most prominent in anxiety/somatic factor and mood/cognition factor, improvement in sleep factor was not observed. No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSION

Add-on ketamine seems to be a good choice for the treatment of anhedonia in treatment resistant bipolar depression. It also showed a good effect in reducing symptoms of anxiety in this group of patients. Considering unmet needs and the detrimental effect of anhedonia and anxiety, more studies are needed on ketamine treatment in resistant bipolar depression.

Association of subclinical hypothyroidism with metabolic syndrome and its components among outpatients with first-episode drug-naïve major depressive disorder: a large-scale cross-sectional study

Both metabolic syndrome (MetS) and subclinical hypothyroidism (SCH) are prevalent in major depressive disorder (MDD) patients. However, their relationship in this population remains unknown. The study assessed the association between SCH and MetS in 1706 first-episode drug-naïve (FEDN) MDD patients. We also compared the relationship between MetS and clinical symptoms in patients with and without comorbid SCH. The Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale positive subscale, the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale were used to detect clinical symptoms. Serum levels of free triiodothyronine, free thyroxine, thyroid stimulating hormone (TSH), anti-thyroglobulin, thyroid peroxidases antibody, cholesterol, triglycerides, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and fasting glucose were measured. The Area Under the Curve (AUC) was used to test the performance of serum TSH in identifying MetS patients. The prevalence of MetS and SCH was 34.5% (n = 585) and 61% (n = 1034), respectively. The presence of SCH increased the risk of MetS, hyperglycemia, hypertension, obesity, and low HDL-C by 4.91, 3.51, 3.54, 2.02, and 2.34 times, respectively. Serum TSH had a nice ability to distinguish MetS patients from non-MetS patients (AUC value = 0.77). MetS and its components exhibited a positive association with clinical profiles only in SCH patients, but not in non-SCH patients. Taken together, our study suggested SCH was closely related to MetS and might play a vital role in the relationship between MetS and clinical symptoms. Regular thyroid function checks might help early detect MetS.

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.

Comparison of bipolar disorder type II and major depressive disorder

OBJECTIVE

Compare patients diagnosed as DSM-5 type II bipolar disorder (BD2) vs. major depressive disorder (MDD).

METHODS

We compared characteristics of 3246 closely and repeatedly evaluated, consenting, adult patient-subjects (n = 706 BD2, 2540 MDD) at a specialty clinic using bivariate methods and multivariable modeling.

RESULTS

Factors more associated with BD2 than MDD included: [a] descriptors (more familial psychiatric, mood and bipolar disorders and suicide; younger at onset, diagnosis and first-treatment; more education; more unemployment; fewer marriages and children; higher cyclothymic, hyperthymic and irritable temperament ratings, lower anxious); [b] morbidity (more hypomanic, mixed or panic first episodes; more co-occurring general medical diagnoses, more Cluster B personality disorder diagnoses and ADHD; more alcohol and drug abuse and smoking; shorter depressive episodes and interepisode periods; lower intake ratings of depression and anxiety, higher for hypomania; far more mood-switching with antidepressants; lower %-time depressed; DMI > MDI course-pattern in BD2; more suicide attempts and violent suicidal behavior); [c] item-scores with intake HDRS₂₁ higher for suicidality, paranoia, anhedonia, guilt, and circadian variation; lower somatic anxiety, depressed mood, insight, hypochondriasis, agitation, and insomnia; and [d] treatment (more lithium, mood-stabilizing anticonvulsants and antipsychotics, less antidepressants and benzodiazepines).

CONCLUSIONS

BD2 and MDD subjects differed greatly in many descriptive, psychopathological and treatment measures, notably including more familial risk, earlier onset, more frequent recurrences and greater suicidal risk with BD2. Such differences can contribute to improving differentiation of the disorders and planning for their treatment.