Bipolar disorder and addictions: the elephant in the room

An open label pilot trial of low-dose lithium for young people at ultra-high risk for psychosis

AIM

Lithium, even at low doses, appears to offer neuroprotection against a wide variety of insults. In this controlled pilot, we examined the safety (i.e., side-effect profile) of lithium in a sample of young people identified at ultra-high risk (UHR) for psychosis. The secondary aim was to explore whether lithium provided a signal of clinical efficacy in reducing transition to psychosis compared with treatment as usual (TAU).

METHODS

Young people attending the PACE clinic at Orygen, Melbourne, were prescribed a fixed dose (450 mg) of lithium (n = 25) or received TAU (n = 78). The primary outcome examined side-effects, with transition to psychosis, functioning and measures of psychopathology assessed as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Participants in both groups were functionally compromised (lithium group GAF = 56.6; monitoring group GAF = 56.9). Side-effect assessment indicated that lithium was well-tolerated. 64% (n = 16) of participants in the lithium group were lithium-adherent to week 12. Few cases transitioned to psychosis across the study period; lithium group 4% (n = 1); monitoring group 7.7% (n = 6). There was no difference in time to transition to psychosis between the groups. No group differences were observed in other functioning and symptom domains, although all outcomes improved over time.

CONCLUSIONS

With a side-effect profile either comparable to, or better than UHR antipsychotic trials, lithium might be explored for further research with UHR young people. A definitive larger trial is needed to determine the efficacy of lithium in this cohort.

Clinical characteristics and impacts of HIV infection in people with bipolar disorders

BACKGROUND

People with bipolar disorders (BD) may be at increased risk of Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) infection but our understanding of the impacts of HIV infection on psychiatric outcomes is poor. This study aimed to examine the prevalence, temporal relationship, and clinical impact of HIV infection in people with BD.

METHODS

In this retrospective case-control study, anonymised electronic case records of patients with BD who had been under the care of South London and Maudsley mental health services were used for data extraction. 54 HIV+ people with BD were identified and compared to a matched control group of 54 HIV- people with BD.

RESULTS

The prevalence of HIV co-morbidity in the BD population was around 1%. 76% of HIV+ BD men identified as men who have sex with men (MSM). 65% of the HIV+ BD group were diagnosed with BD before becoming HIV+. The HIV+ BD group experienced significantly higher rates of stimulant, GBL/GHB and psychedelic use compared to the HIV- BD group. 85% of the HIV+ BD group were recorded as taking antiretroviral medications.

LIMITATIONS

Retrospective and cross-sectional study design, and a relatively small sample size CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of HIV comorbidity in BD was comparable to the local general population. HIV infection in BD is associated with MSM status and stimulant, GHB/GBL and psychedelics use suggesting that HIV prevention strategies should particularly target these groups. Lower use of antiretroviral medications by people with BD underlines the importance of engaging HIV+ BD people in HIV services.

Relation between smoking and visual processing in bipolar disorder

BACKGROUND

Although some studies have shown impairments in patients with bipolar disorder (BPD) and in smokers, it is unclear how these two factors work together. Our premise was that chronic smoking affects color discrimination and this is more pronounced in BPD. Objective: Our main purpose was to investigate the influence of smoking and BPD on color discrimination. Methods: Twenty-three smokers and 23 BPD smokers patients, aged 25-45 years old, participated in this study. Color vision testing was performed using the Trivector subtest of the Cambridge Colour Test. Participants' task was to indicate the pseudoisochromatic stimulus in four directions (up, down, right, and left). Results: It was shown that the smokers had better color vision than BPD smokers for the Protan (p < .001), Deutan (p < .001), and Tritan (p < .001) (red, green, and blue, respectively) axes. Thus, the BPD smokers' group had greater difficulty distinguishing the chromaticity variations (i.e., presented diffuse color vision impairments and not specific to any axis). Conclusions: The present study highlights a possible relationship between smoking and BPD in color discrimination. This highlights the importance of understanding the diffuse effects of this relationship.

Pharmacological Treatment of Mood Disorders and Comorbid Addictions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Traitement Pharmacologique des Troubles de L'humeur et des Dépendances Comorbides: Une Revue Systématique et une Méta-Analyse

OBJECTIVE

Addiction comorbidity is an important clinical challenge in mood disorders, but the best way of pharmacologically treating people with mood disorders and addictions remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for mood and addiction symptoms in people with mood disorders and addiction comorbidity.

METHODS

A systematic search of placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of pharmacological treatments in people with bipolar disorder (BD) or major depressive disorder (MDD), and comorbid addictions was performed. Treatment-related effects on mood and addiction measures were assessed in a meta-analysis, which also estimated risks of participant dropout and adverse effects.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies met systematic review inclusion criteria. Pharmacological therapy was more effective than placebo for improving manic symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.15; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.29 to -0.02; P = 0.03) but not BD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.09; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.03; P = 0.15). Quetiapine significantly improved manic symptoms (SMD = -0.23; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.06; P = 0.008) but not BD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.07; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.10; P = 0.42). Pharmacological therapy was more effective than placebo for improving depressive symptoms in MDD (SMD = -0.16; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.03; P = 0.02). Imipramine improved MDD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.58; 95% CI, -1.03 to -0.13; P = 0.01) but Selective serotonin reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI)-based treatments had no effect (SMD = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.30 to 0.17; P = 0.60). Pharmacological treatment improved the odds of alcohol abstinence in MDD but had no effects on opiate abstinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological treatments were significantly better than placebo in improving manic symptoms, MDD depressive symptoms, and alcohol abstinence but were not better for bipolar depression symptoms. Importantly, quetiapine was not more effective than placebo in improving bipolar depression symptoms nor were SSRI's for the treatment of MDD depression. Our findings highlight the need for further high-quality clinical trials of treatments for mood disorders and comorbid addictions.

Bipolar depression: a major unsolved challenge

Depression in bipolar disorder (BD) patients presents major clinical challenges. As the predominant psychopathology even in treated BD, depression is associated not only with excess morbidity, but also mortality from co-occurring general-medical disorders and high suicide risk. In BD, risks for medical disorders including diabetes or metabolic syndrome, and cardiovascular disorders, and associated mortality rates are several-times above those for the general population or with other psychiatric disorders. The SMR for suicide with BD reaches 20-times above general-population rates, and exceeds rates with other major psychiatric disorders. In BD, suicide is strongly associated with mixed (agitated-dysphoric) and depressive phases, time depressed, and hospitalization. Lithium may reduce suicide risk in BD; clozapine and ketamine require further testing. Treatment of bipolar depression is far less well investigated than unipolar depression, particularly for long-term prophylaxis. Short-term efficacy of antidepressants for bipolar depression remains controversial and they risk clinical worsening, especially in mixed states and with rapid-cycling. Evidence of efficacy of lithium and anticonvulsants for bipolar depression is very limited; lamotrigine has long-term benefit, but valproate and carbamazepine are inadequately tested and carry high teratogenic risks. Evidence is emerging of short-term efficacy of several modern antipsychotics (including cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and quetiapine) for bipolar depression, including with mixed features, though they risk adverse metabolic and neurological effects.

The importance and implications of comparator selection in pharmacoepidemiologic research

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Pharmacoepidemiologic studies employing large databases are critical to evaluating the effectiveness and safety of drug exposures in large and diverse populations. Because treatment is not randomized, researchers must select a relevant comparison group for the treatment of interest. The comparator group can consist of individuals initiating: (1) a similarly indicated treatment (active comparator), (2) a treatment used for a different indication (inactive comparator) or (3) no particular treatment (non-initiators). Herein we review recent literature and describe considerations and implications of comparator selection in pharmacoepidemiologic studies.

RECENT FINDINGS

Comparator selection depends on the scientific question and feasibility constraints. Because pharmacoepidemiologic studies rely on the choice to initiate or not initiate a specific treatment, rather than randomization, they are at-risk for confounding related to the comparator choice including: by indication, disease severity and frailty. We describe forms of confounding specific to pharmacoepidemiologic studies and discuss each comparator along with informative examples and a case study. We provide commentary on potential issues relevant to comparator selection in each study, highlighting the importance of understanding the population in whom the treatment is given and how patient characteristics are associated with the outcome.

SUMMARY

Advanced statistical techniques may be insufficient for reducing confounding in observational studies. Evaluating the extent to which comparator selection may mitigate or induce systematic bias is a critical component of pharmacoepidemiologic studies.