A 6 week randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial of ziprasidone for the acute depressive mixed state

Taiwan consensus on biological treatment of bipolar disorder during the acute, maintenance, and mixed phases: The 2022 update

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder is a mood dysregulation characterized by recurrent symptoms and episodes of mania, hypomania, depression, and mixed mood. The complexity of treating patients with bipolar disorder prompted the Taiwanese Society of Biological Psychiatry and Neuropsychopharmacology (TSBPN) to publish the first Taiwan consensus on pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorders in 2012. This paper presents the updated consensus, with changes in diagnostic criteria (i.e., mixed features) and emerging pharmacological evidence published up to April 2022.

METHODS

Our working group systemically reviewed the clinical research evidence and international guidelines and determined the levels of evidence for each pharmacological treatment on the basis of the most recent World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry grading system. Four clinical-specific issues were proposed. The current TSBPN Bipolar Taskforce then discussed research evidence and clinical experience related to each treatment option in terms of efficacy and acceptability and then appraised final recommendation grades through anonymous voting.

RESULTS

In the updated consensus, we include the pharmacological recommendations for bipolar disorder with mixed features considering its high prevalence, the severe clinical prognosis, and the absence of approved medications. Cariprazine, lurasidone, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, and ketamine are incorporated as treatment options. In the maintenance phase, the application of long-acting injectable antipsychotics is emphasized, and the hazards of using antidepressants and conventional antipsychotics are proposed.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated Taiwan consensus on pharmacological treatment for bipolar disorder provides concise evidence-based and empirical recommendations for clinical psychiatric practice. It may facilitate treatment outcome improvement in patients with bipolar disorder.

Clinical research diagnostic criteria for bipolar illness (CRDC-BP): rationale and validity

BACKGROUND

In the 1970 s, scientific research on psychiatric nosology was summarized in Research Diagnostic Criteria (RDC), based solely on empirical data, an important source for the third revision of the official nomenclature of the American Psychiatric Association in 1980, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, Third Edition (DSM-III). The intervening years, especially with the fourth edition in 1994, saw a shift to a more overtly "pragmatic" approach to diagnostic definitions, which were constructed for many purposes, with research evidence being only one consideration. The latest editions have been criticized as failing to be useful for research. Biological and clinical research rests on the validity of diagnostic definitions that are supported by firm empirical foundations, but critics note that DSM criteria have failed to prioritize research data in favor of "pragmatic" considerations.

RESULTS

Based on prior work of the International Society for Bipolar Diagnostic Guidelines Task Force, we propose here Clinical Research Diagnostic Criteria for Bipolar Illness (CRDC-BP) for use in research studies, with the hope that these criteria may lead to further refinement of diagnostic definitions for other major mental illnesses in the future. New proposals are provided for mixed states, mood temperaments, and duration of episodes.

CONCLUSIONS

A new CRDC could provide guidance toward an empirically-based, scientific psychiatric nosology, and provide an alternative clinical diagnostic approach to the DSM system.

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

OBJECTIVES

The 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) guidelines provided clinicians with pragmatic treatment recommendations for bipolar disorder (BD). While these guidelines included commentary on how mixed features may direct treatment selection, specific recommendations were not provided-a critical gap which the current update aims to address.

METHOD

Overview of research regarding mixed presentations in BD, with treatment recommendations developed using a modified CANMAT/ISBD rating methodology. Limitations are discussed, including the dearth of high-quality data and reliance on expert opinion.

RESULTS

No agents met threshold for first-line treatment of DSM-5 manic or depressive episodes with mixed features. For mania + mixed features second-line treatment options include asenapine, cariprazine, divalproex, and aripiprazole. In depression + mixed features, cariprazine and lurasidone are recommended as second-line options. For DSM-IV defined mixed episodes, with a longer history of research, asenapine and aripiprazole are first-line, and olanzapine (monotherapy or combination), carbamazepine, and divalproex are second-line. Research on maintenance treatments following a DSM-5 mixed presentation is extremely limited, with third-line recommendations based on expert opinion. For maintenance treatment following a DSM-IV mixed episode, quetiapine (monotherapy or combination) is first-line, and lithium and olanzapine identified as second-line options.

CONCLUSION

The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope these guidelines provide valuable support for clinicians providing care to patients experiencing mixed presentations, as well as further influence investment in research to improve diagnosis and treatment of this common and complex clinical state.

Lurasidone Efficacy in Mixed Depressive States: A Comparison of Standard Rating Scales to the Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale

INTRODUCTION

A new mood rating scale for mixed states of depression along with manic-like excitatory symptoms, the Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale (KMDRS), was assessed in a post hoc analysis of a randomized clinical trial of lurasidone versus placebo in major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features.

METHODS

The KMDRS was compared with the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Item weighting was performed and compared with an original KMDRS validation data set. Weighting was used to provide imputed KMDRS scores in the lurasidone study, based on observed MADRS and YMRS scores.

RESULTS

Standardized effect sizes were larger for MADRS (0.61) and YMRS (0.79) than for KMDRS (0.44, Cohen d).

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis did not find that the KMDRS produced a larger effect size than the MADRS in Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorder-5 (DSM-5) defined MDD with mixed features. The lower utility of KMDRS may be due to the imputed nature of this analysis, or also to the DSM-5 defined patient population, which may reflect mixed hypomania rather than mixed depression.

Diagnosing and treating major depressive episodes that lie along the mood disorders spectrum: focus on depression with mixed features

Growing evidence indicates that historical descriptions of mixed depression-broadly defined as major depressive episodes with subthreshold manic or hypomanic (hypo/manic) symptoms-are incredibly clinically relevant in this day-and-age. However, the first operational definition of mixed depression did not occur in the modern nomenclature until 2013 with publication of Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th Edition (DSM-5), and there has not been enough time to evaluate these criteria empirically. Thus, the most valid operational definition of a mixed depressive episode is still unknown, widely accepted treatment guidelines are not available, and no treatment has regulatory approval for mixed depression-whether associated with bipolar I disorder, bipolar II disorder, or major depressive disorder. This is despite seven drugs having regulatory indications for mixed episodes, defined as the co-occurrence of syndromal depression and syndromal mania, and now recognized as mania with mixed features by DSM-5. Indeed, we found only two randomized, placebo-controlled trials in patients with protocol defined mixed depression, one with ziprasidone and one with lurasidone. Both studies were positive, suggesting treatment with second-generation antipsychotics may be helpful for mixed depressive episodes associated with bipolar II or unipolar disorder. We found no randomized control trial of antidepressant monotherapy in mixed depression and many clinical reports that such treatment may worsen mixed depression Randomized, placebo-controlled trials of antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood stabilizers-alone and in combination-in individuals with carefully defined mixed depression are needed before firm treatment guidelines can be produced.

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies

OBJECTIVE

Mixed presentations, defined by simultaneous occurrence of depressive and manic symptoms, are difficult to treat. Antidepressants, although commonly used, have weak evidence of efficacy and may increase risk of mood destabilization. The aim of this pooled post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of bipolar depression with or without concurrent manic symptoms.

METHODS

Patients from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies who met DSM-IV-TR or DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder with a current major depressive episode were identified to have concurrent manic symptoms by baseline Young Mania Rating Scale total score ≥4. Efficacy was assessed in cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day dose groups versus placebo; analyses included the least squares mean change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score.

RESULTS

Of 1383 patients randomized to treatment, 808 (58.4%) had concurrent manic symptoms. For patients with manic symptoms, mean reduction in MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 was significantly greater for both cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day compared with placebo, with least squares mean differences (LSMDs) versus placebo of -2.5 (p = .0033) and -2.9 (p = .0010), respectively; for patients without manic symptoms, the LSMD was significant for 1.5 mg/day (-3.3; p = .0008), but not for 3 mg/day (-1.9; p = .0562).

CONCLUSION

The results of this post hoc analysis suggest that cariprazine may be an appropriate treatment option for patients with bipolar I depression with or without manic symptoms, with higher doses potentially more effective in patients with manic symptoms.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.

DATA SOURCES

A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

RESULTS

Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.

REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).

Pharmacologic Treatment of Mixed States

Despite the relatively high prevalence of mixed symptoms and features among patients with mood disorders, the current literature supporting the specific efficacy of second-generation antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for the treatment of mixed symptoms is limited. Several studies have demonstrated that acute affective episodes with mixed symptoms or features tend to respond unsatisfactory to treatments that are usually more effective for the management of other affective phases. There is clearly a need for clinical trials in order to determine the more adequate pharmacologic option for the treatment of individuals suffering from affective episodes with mixed features.

Treatment of Mixed Features in Bipolar Disorder: an Updated View

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mixed presentations in bipolar disorder have long posed clinical and nosological challenges. The DSM-5 mixed features specifier was developed to provide a more flexible and clinically relevant definition of mixed presentations compared with narrowly defined DSM-IV mixed episodes. However, there is little guidance on treating such presentations. Here, we summarize the evidence for biological treatments of DSM-5 and similarly defined mixed features (MFs).

RECENT FINDINGS

The literature on treating MFs is almost exclusively based on post hoc analyses. Within this limited evidence base is preliminary positive data for aripiprazole, asenapine, cariprazine, olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone in treating acute mania with MFs, and cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine, and ziprasidone for depressive symptoms in depression with MFs. Divalproex may also be efficacious for acute mania with MFs. The few extant maintenance studies suggest that divalproex and olanzapine may have long-term efficacy in those with index MFs or for the prevention of MFs, respectively. The existing evidence suggests that clinicians consider atypical antipsychotics and divalproex for treating acute mixed presentations. However, adequately powered treatment trials-and studies of maintenance and neurostimulation therapies-are needed. Additionally, data-driven techniques to identify relevant symptom clusters may help improve our conceptualization of mixed presentations.

Pharmacological Treatment of Major Depressive Episodes with Mixed Features: A Systematic Review

We reviewed clinical studies investigating the pharmacological treatment of major depressive episodes (MDEs) with mixed features diagnosed according to the dimensional criteria (more than two or three [hypo]manic symptoms+principle depressive symptoms). We systematically reviewed published randomized controlled trials on the pharmacological treatment of MDEs with mixed features associated with mood disorders, including major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD). We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases through December 2017 with the following key word combinations linked with the word OR: (a) mixed or mixed state, mixed features, DMX, mixed depression; (b) depressive, major depressive, MDE, MDD, bipolar, bipolar depression; and (c) antidepressant, antipsychotic, mood stabilizer, anticonvulsant, treatment, medication, algorithm, guideline, pharmacological. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We found few randomized trials on pharmacological treatments for MDEs with mixed features. Of the 36 articles assessed for eligibility, 11 investigated MDEs with mixed features in mood disorders: six assessed the efficacy of antipsychotic drugs (lurasidone and ziprasidone) in the acute phase of MDD with mixed features, although four of these were post hoc analyses based on large randomized controlled trials. Four studies compared antipsychotic drugs (olanzapine, lurasidone, and ziprasidone) with placebo, and one study assessed the efficacy of combination therapy (olanzapine+fluoxetine) in the acute phase of BD with mixed features. Pharmacological treatments for MDEs with mixed features have focused on antipsychotics, although evidence of their efficacy is lacking. Additional well-designed clinical trials are needed.

Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression

OBJECTIVE

Activation encompasses energy and activity and is a central feature of bipolar disorder. However, the impact of activation on treatment response of bipolar depression requires further exploration. The aims of this study were to assess the association of decreased activation and sustained remission in bipolar depression and test for factors that could affect this association.

METHODS

We assessed participants with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed) bipolar depression ( n = 303) included in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium- and quetiapine-based treatments (the Bipolar CHOICE study). Activation was evaluated using items from the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale. The selection of these items was based on a dimension of energy and interest symptoms associated with poorer treatment response in major depression.

RESULTS

Decreased activation was associated with lower remission rates in the raw analyses and in a logistic regression model adjusted for baseline severity and subsyndromal manic symptoms (odds ratio = 0.899; p = 0.015). The manic features also predicted lower remission (odds ratio = 0.934; p < 0.001). Remission rates were similar in the two treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression. Patients with these features may require specific treatment approaches, but new studies are necessary to identify treatments that could improve outcomes in this population.

Mixed states in bipolar and major depressive disorders: systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines

OBJECTIVE

This systematic review provided a critical synthesis and a comprehensive overview of guidelines on the treatment of mixed states.

METHOD

The MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception to March 21st, 2018. International guidelines covering the treatment of mixed episodes, manic/hypomanic, or depressive episodes with mixed features were considered for inclusion. A methodological quality assessment was conducted with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-AGREE II.

RESULTS

The final selection yielded six articles. Despite their heterogeneity, all guidelines agreed in interrupting an antidepressant monotherapy or adding mood-stabilizing medications. Olanzapine seemed to have the best evidence for acute mixed hypo/manic/depressive states and maintenance treatment. Aripiprazole and paliperidone were possible alternatives for acute hypo/manic mixed states. Lurasidone and ziprasidone were useful in acute mixed depression. Valproate was recommended for the prevention of new mixed episodes while lithium and quetiapine in preventing affective episodes of all polarities. Clozapine and electroconvulsive therapy were effective in refractory mixed episodes. The AGREE II overall assessment rate ranged between 42% and 92%, indicating different quality level of included guidelines.

CONCLUSION

The unmet needs for the mixed symptoms treatment were associated with diagnostic issues and limitations of previous research, particularly for maintenance treatment.

Rethinking the spectrum of mood disorders: implications for diagnosis and management - Proceedings of a symposium presented at the 30th Annual European College of Neuropsychopharmacology Congress, 4 September 2017, Paris, France

The simultaneous occurrence of manic and depressive features has been recognized since classical times, but the term 'mixed state' was first used by Kraepelin at the end of the 19th century. From the 1980s, until the advent of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fifth edition (DSM-5), psychiatric disorders were classified using a categorical approach. However, it was recognized that such an approach was too rigid to encompass the range of symptomatology encountered in clinical practice. Therefore, a dimensional approach was adopted in DSM-5, in which affective states are considered to be distributed across a continuum ranging from pure mania to pure depression. In addition, the copresence of symptoms of the opposite pole are captured using a 'with mixed features' specifier, applied when three or more nonoverlapping subthreshold symptoms of the opposite pole are present. Mixed features are common in patients with mood episodes, complicating the course of illness, reducing treatment response and worsening outcomes. However, research in this area is scarce and treatment options are limited. Current evidence indicates that antidepressants should be avoided for the treatment of bipolar mixed states. Evidence for bipolar mixed states supports the use of several second-generation antipsychotics, valproate and electroconvulsive therapy. One randomized controlled trial has demonstrated the efficacy of lurasidone, compared with placebo, in patients with major depressive disorder with mixed features, and there is limited evidence supporting the use of ziprasidone in such patients. Further research is required to determine whether other antipsychotic agents, or additional therapeutic approaches, might also be effective in this setting.

The Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale (KMDRS): An International Mood Network (IMN) validation study of a new mixed mood rating scale

BACKGROUND

It has been proposed that the broad major depressive disorder (MDD) construct is heterogenous. Koukopoulos has provided diagnostic criteria for an important subtype within that construct, "mixed depression" (MxD), which encompasses clinical pictures characterized by marked psychomotor or inner excitation and rage/anger, along with severe depression. This study provides psychometric validation for the first rating scale specifically designed to assess MxD symptoms cross-sectionally, the Koukopoulos Mixed Depression Rating Scale (KMDRS).

METHODS

350 patients from the international mood network (IMN) completed three rating scales: the KMDRS, Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). KMDRS' psychometric properties assessed included Cronbach's alpha, inter-rater reliability, factor analysis, predictive validity, and Receiver Operator Curve analysis.

RESULTS

Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha = 0.76; 95% CI 0.57, 0.94) and interrater reliability (kappa = 0.73) were adequate. Confirmatory factor analysis identified 2 components: anger and psychomotor excitation (80% of total variance). Good predictive validity was seen (C-statistic = 0.82 95% CI 0.68, 0.93). Severity cut-off scores identified were as follows: none (0-4), possible (5-9), mild (10-15), moderate (16-20) and severe (> 21) MxD.

LIMITATIONS

Non DSM-based diagnosis of MxD may pose some difficulties in the initial use and interpretation of the scoring of the scale. Moreover, the cross-sectional nature of the evaluation does not verify the long-term stability of the scale.

CONCLUSIONS

KMDRS was a reliable and valid instrument to assess MxD symptoms.

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.

Korean Medication Algorithm for Depressive Disorders 2017: Third Revision

OBJECTIVE

In 2002, the Korean Society for Affective Disorders developed the guidelines for the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD), and revised it in 2006 and 2012. The third revision of these guidelines was undertaken to reflect advances in the field.

METHODS

Using a 44-item questionnaire, an expert consensus was obtained on pharmacological treatment strategies for MDD 1) without or 2) with psychotic features, 3) depression subtypes, 4) maintenance, 5) special populations, 6) the choice of an antidepressant (AD) regarding safety and adverse effects, and 7) non-pharmacological biological therapies. Recommended first, second, and third-line strategies were derived statistically.

RESULTS

AD monotherapy is recommended as the first-line strategy for non-psychotic depression in adults, children/adolescents, elderly adults, patient with persistent depressive disorder, and pregnant women or patients with postpartum depression or premenstrual dysphoric disorder. The combination of AD and atypical antipsychotics (AAP) was recommended for psychotic depression in adult, child/adolescent, postpartum depression, and mixed features or anxious distress. Most experts recommended stopping the ongoing initial AD and AAP after a certain period in patients with one or two depressive episodes. As an MDD treatment modality, 92% of experts are considering electroconvulsive therapy and 46.8% are applying it clinically, while 86% of experts are considering repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation but only 31.6% are applying it clinically.

CONCLUSION

The pharmacological treatment strategy in 2017 is similar to that of Korean Medication Algorithm for Depressive Disorder 2012. The preference of AAPs was more increased.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for the Biological Treatment of Bipolar Disorders: Acute and long-term treatment of mixed states in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Although clinically highly relevant, the recognition and treatment of bipolar mixed states has played only an underpart in recent guidelines. This WFSBP guideline has been developed to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence pertaining to the acute and long-term treatment of bipolar mixed states in adults.

METHODS

Material used for these guidelines is based on a systematic literature search using various data bases. Their scientific rigour was categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F), and different grades of recommendation to ensure practicability were assigned. We examined data pertaining to the acute treatment of manic and depressive symptoms in bipolar mixed patients, as well as data pertaining to the prevention of mixed recurrences after an index episode of any type, or recurrence of any type after a mixed index episode.

RESULTS

Manic symptoms in bipolar mixed states appeared responsive to treatment with several atypical antipsychotics, the best evidence resting with olanzapine. For depressive symptoms, addition of ziprasidone to treatment as usual may be beneficial; however, the evidence base is much more limited than for the treatment of manic symptoms. Besides olanzapine and quetiapine, valproate and lithium should also be considered for recurrence prevention.

LIMITATIONS

The concept of mixed states changed over time, and recently became much more comprehensive with the release of DSM-5. As a consequence, studies in bipolar mixed patients targeted slightly different bipolar subpopulations. In addition, trial designs in acute and maintenance treatment also advanced in recent years in response to regulatory demands.

CONCLUSIONS

Current treatment recommendations are still based on limited evidence, and there is a clear demand for confirmative studies adopting the DSM-5 specifier with mixed features concept.

Mixed states in bipolar disorder - changes in DSM-5 and current treatment recommendations

OBJECTIVE

Mixed states in affective disorders represent a particular challenge in clinical routine, characterized by a complicated course of treatment and a worse treatment response.

METHODS

Clinical features of mixed states and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) criteria are presented and critical discussed. We then performed a systematic review using the terms 'bipolar', 'mixed' and 'randomized' to evaluate current treatment options.

RESULTS

For pharmacological treatment of mixed states in total, there is still insufficient data from RCTs. However, there is some evidence for efficacy in mixed states from RCTs for atypical antipsychotics, especially olanzapine, aripiprazole and asenapine as well as mood stabilizers as valproate and carbamazepine.

CONCLUSIONS

Mixed states are of a high clinical relevance and the DSM-5 criteria substantially reduced the diagnostic threshold. Besides advantages of a better characterization of patients with former DSM-IV-defined mixed episodes, disadvantages arise for example differential diagnoses with a substantial overlap in symptoms such as borderline personality disorders. Atypical antipsychotics, valproate and carbamazepine demonstrated efficacy in a limited sample of RCTs.

LIMITATIONS

The number of RCTs in the treatment of mixed states is highly limited. Furthermore, nearly all studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies which may lead to an underestimation of classical mood stabilizers such as lithium.

An Open Trial of Iloperidone for Mixed Episodes in Bipolar Disorder

BACKGROUND

Mixed mood states in bipolar disorder are difficult to treat and when present indicate worse illness trajectories. Several medications are US Food and Drug Administration approved to treat mixed episodes; however, the clinical trials have been short term and rarely reported depression response.

METHODS

We conducted a 5-month open-label trial examining the tolerability and efficacy of iloperidone for bipolar disorder mixed episodes.

RESULTS

Mania and depression scores significantly improved over the course of the study for study completers (ie, 60%-68% improvement for manic symptoms and 41%-49% for depression symptoms). Improvements were observed early in the trial and after adjusting for concomitant medication effects. The average daily dose in completers was 15 mg. Thirty-nine percent (12/31) of the eligible sample discontinued early because of adverse effects. The adverse events most commonly associated with withdrawal were increased heart rate/palpitations (n = 5 of 12) and urinary incontinence/intense urge to urinate (n = 3 of 12).

CONCLUSIONS

In a subset of patients, iloperidone provides relief for classic manic, depression, and irritability symptoms associated with mixed episodes in a long-term trial. Adverse effect profiles are likely to be a major factor contributing to individualized medication use.

Validating a two-dimensional bipolar spectrum model integrating DSM-5's mixed features specifier for Major Depressive Disorder

INTRODUCTION

The literature on DSM-5's 'Major Depressive Disorder with lifetime mixed features' (MDD-MF) is limited. This study investigated MDD-MF's potential inclusion into a bipolar spectrum.

METHODS

We recruited 287 patients with Bipolar I disorder (BD-I), BD-II, MDD-MF or 'MDD without lifetime mixed features' (MDD-noMF); most (N=280) were stabilized for at least one year on medication. Sixteen validators (clinical features, psychiatric family history, temperament, stabilizing treatment) were compared across groups and subjected to trend analyses. Two discriminant function analyses (DFA; primary and secondary), excluding or including, respectively, treatment-related predictors, explored latent dimensions maximizing between-group discrimination; mahalanobis distances between group 'centroids' were calculated.

RESULTS

Eleven validators differed significantly across groups; nine varied monotonically along a bipolar diathesis gradient with significant linear trends; two peaked at MDD-MF and displayed significant quadratic trends. In the primary DFA, apart from a classic bipolarity dimension, correlating with hospitalizations, early age at onset, lifetime psychosis and lower anxious temperament scores, on which groups ranked along a bipolar propensity gradient, a second dimension was also significant, peaking at BD-II and MDD-MF (challenging the classic bipolar ranking), which correlated with lifetime psychiatric comorbidities, suicidality, lower lifetime psychosis rates, female gender, higher cyclothymic and lower depressive temperament scores; MDD-MF was equipoised amidst BD-II and MDD-noMF. After including treatment-related predictors (secondary DFA), discrimination improved overall but BD-II and MDD-MF were closest than any other pair, suggesting similar treatment patterns for these two groups at this naturalistic setting.

CONCLUSIONS

To our knowledge, this is the first time a two-dimensional bipolar spectrum based on classic external validators is proposed, fitting the data better than a unidimensional model. Additional predictors are warranted to improve BD-II/MDD-MF discrimination.

Treatment of mixed features in bipolar disorder

Mood episodes with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-defined mixed features are highly prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD), affecting ~40% of patients during the course of illness. Mixed states are associated with poorer clinical outcomes, greater treatment resistance, higher rates of comorbidity, more frequent mood episodes, and increased rates of suicide. The objectives of the current review are to identify, summarize, and synthesize studies assessing the efficacy of treatments specifically for BD I and II mood episodes (ie, including manic, hypomanic, and major depressive episodes) with DSM-5-defined mixed features. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 post-hoc analyses were identified, all of which assessed the efficacy of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for the acute treatment of BD mood episodes with mixed features. Results from these studies provide preliminary support for SGAs as efficacious treatments for both mania with mixed features and bipolar depression with mixed features. However, there are inadequate data to definitively support or refute the clinical use of specific agents. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (eg, lithium and divalproex) have yet to have been adequately studied in DSM-5-defined mixed features. Further study is required to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for BD mood episodes with mixed features.

Treatment recommendations for DSM-5-defined mixed features

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) mixed features specifier provides a less restrictive definition of mixed mood states, compared to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), including mood episodes that manifest with subthreshold symptoms of the opposite mood state. A limited number of studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments specifically for DSM-5-defined mixed features in mood disorders. As such, there is currently an inadequate amount of data to appropriately inform evidence-based treatment guidelines of DSM-5 defined mixed features. However, given the high prevalence and morbidity of mixed features, treatment recommendations based on the currently available evidence along with expert opinion may be of benefit. This article serves to provide these interim treatment recommendations while humbly acknowledging the limited amount of evidence currently available. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) appear to have the greatest promise in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) with mixed features. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (ie, lithium and divalproex) may also be of benefit; however, they have been inadequately studied. In the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features, the comparable efficacy of antidepressants versus other treatments, such as SGAs, remains unknown. As such, antidepressants remain first-line treatment of MDD with or without mixed features; however, there are significant safety concerns associated with antidepressant monotherapy when mixed features are present, which merits increased monitoring. Lurasidone is the only SGA monotherapy that has been shown to be efficacious specifically in the treatment of MDD with mixed features. Further research is needed to accurately determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for mood episodes with mixed features to adequately inform future treatment guidelines.

Pharmacological treatment of mixed states

Mixed states in bipolar disorder have been neglected, and the data concerning treatment of these conditions have been relatively obscure. To address this, we systematically reviewed published pharmacological treatment data for "mixed states/episodes" in mood disorders, including "with mixed features" in DSM-5. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library, clinicaltrials.gov, and controlled-trials.com (with different combinations of the following keywords: "mixed states/features," "bipolar," "depressive symptoms/bipolar depression," "manic symptoms," "treatment," "DSM-5") through to October 2016. We applied a quality-of-evidence approach: first-degree evidence=randomized placebo-controlled studies of pharmacological interventions used as monotherapy; second-degree evidence=a similar design in the absence of a placebo or of a combination therapy as a comparative group; third-degree evidence=case reports, case series, and reviews of published studies. We found very few primary double-blind, placebo-controlled studies on the treatment of mixed states: the preponderance of available data derives from subgroup analysis performed on studies that originally involved manic patients. Future research should study the effects of treatments in mixed states defined using current criteria.

Guidelines for the recognition and management of mixed depression

A significant minority of people presenting with a major depressive episode (MDE) experience co-occurring subsyndromal hypo/manic symptoms. As this presentation may have important prognostic and treatment implications, the DSM-5 codified a new nosological entity, the "mixed features specifier," referring to individuals meeting threshold criteria for an MDE and subthreshold symptoms of (hypo)mania or to individuals with syndromal mania and subthreshold depressive symptoms. The mixed features specifier adds to a growing list of monikers that have been put forward to describe phenotypes characterized by the admixture of depressive and hypomanic symptoms (e.g., mixed depression, depression with mixed features, or depressive mixed states [DMX]). Current treatment guidelines, regulatory approvals, as well the current evidentiary base provide insufficient decision support to practitioners who provide care to individuals presenting with an MDE with mixed features. In addition, all existing psychotropic agents evaluated in mixed patients have largely been confined to patient populations meeting the DSM-IV definition of "mixed states" wherein the co-occurrence of threshold-level mania and threshold-level MDE was required. Toward the aim of assisting clinicians providing care to adults with MDE and mixed features, we have assembled a panel of experts on mood disorders to develop these guidelines on the recognition and treatment of mixed depression, based on the few studies that have focused specifically on DMX as well as decades of cumulated clinical experience.

Major depressive disorder with subthreshold hypomanic (mixed) features: A real-world assessment of treatment patterns and economic burden

BACKGROUND

To compare outcomes for individuals with major depressive disorder (MDD) with or without subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) in naturalistic settings.

METHODS

Using the Optum Research Database (1/1/2009─10/31/2014), a retrospective analysis of individuals newly diagnosed with MDD was conducted. Continuous enrollment for 12-months before and after the initial MDD diagnosis was required. MDD with subthreshold hypomania (mixed features) (MDD-MF) was defined based on ≥1 hypomania diagnosis within 30 days after an MDD diagnosis during the one-year follow-up period, in the absence of bipolar I diagnoses. Psychiatric medication use, healthcare utilization, and costs during the one-year follow-up period were compared using multivariate logistic and gamma regressions, controlling for baseline differences.

RESULTS

Of 130,626 MDD individuals, 652 (0.5%) met the operational definition of MDD-MF. Compared to the MDD-only group, the MDD-MF group had more suicidality (2.0% vs. 0.5%), anxiety disorders (46.8% vs. 34.0%), and substance use disorders (15.5% vs. 6.1%, all P<0.001). More individuals with MDD-MF were treated with antidepressants (83.6% vs. 71.6%), mood stabilizers (50.5% vs. 2.7%), atypical antipsychotics (39.0% vs. 5.5%), and polypharmacy with multiple drug classes (72.1% vs. 22.7%, all P<0.001). Individuals with MDD-MF had higher hospitalizations rates (24.2% vs. 10.5%) and total healthcare costs (mean: $15,660 vs. $10,744, all P<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

The commercial claims data used were not collected for research purposes and may over- or under-represent certain populations. No specific claims-based diagnostic code for MDD with mixed features exists.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater use of mood stabilizers, atypical antipsychotics, polypharmacy, and healthcare resources provides evidence of the complexity and severity of MDD-MF. Identifying optimal treatment regimens for this population represents a major unmet medical need.

A pragmatic approach to the diagnosis and treatment of mixed features in adults with mood disorders

Mixed features specifier (MFS) is a new nosological entity defined and operationalized in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), 5th Edition. The impetus to introduce the MFS and supplant mixed states was protean, including the lack of ecological validity, high rates of misdiagnosis, and guideline discordant treatment for mixed states. Mixed features specifier identifies a phenotype in psychiatry with greater illness burden, as evidenced by earlier age at onset, higher episode frequency and chronicity, psychiatric and medical comorbidity, suicidality, and suboptimal response to conventional antidepressants. Mixed features in psychiatry have historical, conceptual, and nosological relevance; MFS according to DSM-5, is inherently neo-Kraepelinian insofar as individuals with either Major Depressive Disorder (MDD) or Bipolar Disorder (BD) may be affected by MFS. Clinicians are encouraged to screen all patients presenting with a major depressive episode (or hypomanic episode) for MFS. Although "overlapping symptoms" were excluded from the diagnostic criteria (eg, agitation, anxiety, irritability, insomnia), clinicians are encouraged to probe for these nonspecific symptoms as a possible proxy of co-existing MFS. In addition to conventional antidepressants, second generation antipsychotics and/or conventional mood stabilizers (eg, lithium) may be considered as first-line therapies for individuals with a depressive episode as part of MDD or BD with mixed features.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) 2016 Clinical Guidelines for the Management of Adults with Major Depressive Disorder: Section 3. Pharmacological Treatments

BACKGROUND

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) conducted a revision of the 2009 guidelines by updating the evidence and recommendations. The scope of the 2016 guidelines remains the management of major depressive disorder (MDD) in adults, with a target audience of psychiatrists and other mental health professionals.

METHODS

Using the question-answer format, we conducted a systematic literature search focusing on systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Evidence was graded using CANMAT-defined criteria for level of evidence. Recommendations for lines of treatment were based on the quality of evidence and clinical expert consensus. "Pharmacological Treatments" is the third of six sections of the 2016 guidelines. With little new information on older medications, treatment recommendations focus on second-generation antidepressants.

RESULTS

Evidence-informed responses are given for 21 questions under 4 broad categories: 1) principles of pharmacological management, including individualized assessment of patient and medication factors for antidepressant selection, regular and frequent monitoring, and assessing clinical and functional outcomes with measurement-based care; 2) comparative aspects of antidepressant medications based on efficacy, tolerability, and safety, including summaries of newly approved drugs since 2009; 3) practical approaches to pharmacological management, including drug-drug interactions and maintenance recommendations; and 4) managing inadequate response and treatment resistance, with a focus on switching antidepressants, applying adjunctive treatments, and new and emerging agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence-based pharmacological treatments are available for first-line treatment of MDD and for management of inadequate response. However, given the limitations of the evidence base, pharmacological management of MDD still depends on tailoring treatments to the patient.

Major depressive disorder with subthreshold hypomania (mixed features): Clinical characteristics of patients entered in a multiregional, placebo-controlled study

Major depressive disorder (MDD) associated with subthreshold hypomanic symptoms (mixed features), has been identified as a distinct nosological entity in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5). We identified the predominant manic symptoms present at baseline in a multiregional, placebo-controlled trial involving 211 patients with MDD with mixed features (Clinicaltrials.govNCT01421134). Patients with 2 or 3 DSM-5 criteria defined manic symptoms were eligible for the study. At study baseline, increased talkativeness (pressure to keep talking) and flight of ideas (racing thoughts) were endorsed by approximately 65% of patients and a decreased need for sleep was endorsed by 40% of patients. Approximately 60% of patients also endorsed irritability and distractibility at baseline although these symptoms are not generally counted as part of the "mixed" depression diagnosis as they may overlap with criteria for MDD. Thus, five clinical symptoms characterized the manic presentation in the majority of patients diagnosed as having MDD with "mixed" features in this first placebo-controlled trial examining the use of a psychotropic medication (lurasidone) in this population. Our findings support the designation of MDD with mixed features specifier and suggest that this subpopulation of depressed patients may warrant additional medication beyond antidepressants.

Atypical Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Acute Bipolar Depression with Mixed Features: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Evidence supporting the use of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in the treatment of acute depression with mixed features (MFs) associated with bipolar disorder (BD) is scarce and equivocal. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis investigating SGAs in the treatment of acute BD depression with MFs. Two authors independently searched major electronic databases from 1990 until September 2015 for randomized (placebo-) controlled trials (RCTs) or open-label clinical trials investigating the efficacy of SGAs in the treatment of acute bipolar depression with MFs. A random-effect meta-analysis calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) between SGA and placebo for the mean baseline to endpoint change in depression as well as manic symptoms score was computed based on 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six RCTs and one open-label placebo-controlled studies (including post-hoc reports) representing 1023 patients were included. Participants received either ziprasidone, olanzapine, lurasidone, quetiapine or asenapine for an average of 6.5 weeks across the included studies. Meta-analysis with Duval and Tweedie adjustment for publication bias demonstrated that SGA resulted in significant improvements of (hypo-)manic symptoms of bipolar mixed depression as assessed by the means of the total scores of the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) (SMD −0.74, 95% CI −1.20 to −0.28, n SGA = 907, control = 652). Meta-analysis demonstrated that participants in receipt of SGA (n = 979) experienced a large improvement in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores (SMD −1.08, 95% CI −1.35 to −0.81, p < 0.001) vs. placebo (n = 678). Publication and measurement biases and relative paucity of studies. Overall, SGAs appear to offer favorable improvements in MADRS and YMRS scores vs. placebo. Nevertheless, given the preliminary nature of the present report, additional original studies are required to allow more reliable and clinically definitive conclusions.

Diagnosis, Epidemiology and Management of Mixed States in Bipolar Disorder

Approximately 40% of patients with bipolar disorder experience mixed episodes, defined as a manic state with depressive features, or manic symptoms in a patient with bipolar depression. Compared with bipolar patients without mixed features, patients with bipolar mixed states generally have more severe symptomatology, more lifetime episodes of illness, worse clinical outcomes and higher rates of comorbidities, and thus present a significant clinical challenge. Most clinical trials have investigated second-generation neuroleptic monotherapy, monotherapy with anticonvulsants or lithium, combination therapy, and electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). Neuroleptic drugs are often used alone or in combination with anticonvulsants or lithium for preventive treatment, and ECT is an effective treatment for mixed manic episodes in situations where medication fails or cannot be used. Common antidepressants have been shown to worsen mania symptoms during mixed episodes without necessarily improving depressive symptoms; thus, they are not recommended during mixed episodes. A greater understanding of pathophysiological processes in bipolar disorder is now required to provide a more accurate diagnosis and new personalised treatment approaches. Targeted, specific treatments developed through a greater understanding of bipolar disorder pathophysiology, capable of affecting the underlying disease processes, could well prove to be more effective, faster acting, and better tolerated than existing therapies, therefore providing better outcomes for individuals affected by bipolar disorder. Until such time as targeted agents are available, second-generation neuroleptics are emerging as the treatment of choice in the management of mixed states in bipolar disorder.

A 13-week, randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial of ziprasidone in bipolar spectrum disorder

OBJECTIVE

Features of bipolarity in a major depressive disorder sample were used to define a "bipolar spectrum disorder" population for treatment with a neuroleptic agent, ziprasidone.

METHODS

Forty-nine acutely depressed patients were randomized to ziprasidone-washout-placebo or placebo-washout-ziprasidone in this double-blind, prospective, 13-week crossover trial. All patients met the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, criteria for a major depressive episode and were positive for at least 3 predictors of bipolarity: family history of bipolar disorder, antidepressant-induced mania, highly recurrent depressive episodes (>5), atypical depression, early onset of depression (<age 20), failure to respond to antidepressants or antidepressant tolerance. The most common bipolarity inclusion criteria were antidepressant tolerance and nonresponse, and atypical depression. Approximately 52% received ziprasidone in monotherapy, 48% as adjunct to antidepressants.

RESULTS

There was a small statistically nonsignificant benefit with ziprasidone compared with placebo on Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale change [-1.5 (p = 0.48)]. Statistical carryover effects were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Ziprasidone, alone or added to antidepressants, was not more effective than placebo in this population. A false-negative finding due to the crossover design is suggested by statistical carryover effects. Alternatively, this definition of bipolar spectrum illness may have been too nonspecific to show neuroleptic benefit, unlike other definitions, like "mixed depression." Also, this study did not test potential neuroleptic efficacy without the potentially mood-destabilizing effects of antidepressants.

Depressive mixed states: A reappraisal of Koukopoulos' criteria

BACKGROUND

Mixed states have been a fundamental part of Kraepelin׳s conceptualization of the manic-depressive illness. However, after Kraepelin, the study of mixed states was not of great interest, until the publication of the RDC criteria (1978) and then the DSM-III edition (1980), where criteria for mixed manic states were operationalized. The most notable victims of DSM nosology were depressive mixed states, in particular depression with flight of ideas and excited (agitated) depression.

METHODS

We briefly review the clinical work of Athanasios Koukopoulos on depressive mixed states (in particular agitated depression) pointing out the diagnostic and therapeutic contributions, especially in the lights of Koukopoulos׳ first description of depressive mixed syndrome in 1992.

RESULTS

The mixed depressive syndrome is not a transitory state but a state of long duration, which may last weeks or several months. The clinical picture is characterized by dysphoric mood, emotional lability, psychic and/or motor agitation, talkativeness, crowded and/or racing thoughts, rumination, initial or middle insomnia. Impulsive suicidal attempts may be frequent. The family observes incessant complaints, irritability, occasional verbal outbursts, occasional physical aggression, and occasional hypersexuality. Treatment with antipsychotics and ECT is very effective; antidepressants can worsen the clinical picture.

LIMITATIONS

Selective but not systematic review of the literature on depressive mixed states. Relatively little research data is currently available for validation of the criteria proposed by Koukopoulos.

CONCLUSIONS

Koukopoulos׳ proposal of mixed depression, besides its diagnostic implications, clearly identifying it as manifestations of bipolar disorder, allows for better clinical characterization of cases and improves treatment decisions.

Can Atypical Antipsychotic Augmentation Reduce Subsequent Treatment Failure More Effectively Among Depressed Patients with a Higher Degree of Treatment Resistance? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Atypical antipsychotic augmentation was demonstrated to be efficacious in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in previous meta-analyses. We investigate whether there are differences in the effect size of atypical antipsychotic augmentation in major depressive disorder according to the degree of treatment resistance.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of four databases identified 11 randomized controlled trials. The 11 trials, which included 3 341 participants, were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Atypical antipsychotic augmentation of antidepressant therapy showed superior efficacy compared to antidepressant monotherapy in TRD in terms of both response and remission rates (response, risk ratio [RR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.25 to 1.53; remission, RR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.42 to 1.85). In addition, regarding response rates in the TRD trials, atypical antipsychotic augmentation exhibited significantly different effect sizes according to the degree of treatment resistance (TRD 1: RR = 1.24; TRD 2: RR = 1.37; TRD 2-4: RR = 1.58). In non-TRD trials, atypical antipsychotic augmentation failed to show superior efficacy over antidepressant monotherapy in terms of remission rates (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.14). Atypical antipsychotic augmentation of antidepressant therapy exhibits greater effect size in patients with a higher degree of treatment resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

This finding strengthens the rationale for considering atypical antipsychotic augmentation among depressed patients with multiple previous treatment failures in clinical practice. The efficacy of atypical antipsychotic augmentation for non-TRD seems to be different from that for TRD and, thus, further studies of non-TRD populations are needed.

DSM-5 reviewed from different angles: goal attainment, rationality, use of evidence, consequences--part 1: general aspects and paradigmatic discussion of depressive disorders

DSM-5 was published in 2013 after about 10 years of preparation. Part 1 of this paper discusses several more general aspects of DSM-5 and offers a detailed, paradigmatic analysis of changes made to the chapter on depressive disorders. The background for the changes is analysed on the basis of a PubMed search and review papers on the classification of mental disorders in general and on empirical knowledge about individual disorders. Contrary to the original plans, DSM-5 has not introduced a primarily dimensional diagnostic system but has widely preserved the categorical system of disorders. Also, it has not adopted a more neurobiological approach to disorders by including biological markers to increase the objectivity of psychiatric diagnoses but has maintained the primarily symptom-based, descriptive approach. The criteria for some disorders have been changed, including affective, schizophrenic and addiction disorders, and a few new disorders have been added. A minimal version of the dimensional approach was realised through the introduction of several transnosological specifiers and the option to make symptom- or syndrome-related severity and dimensional assessments. These specifiers and assessments might allow a more individualised description of a patient's psychopathological state and more personalised treatment. However, most of the symptom- and syndrome-related assessments are not mandatory and therefore may not be used in clinical practice.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics, safety and clinical efficacy of ziprasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Multiple strategies exist for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders. In the last 20 years, several 'new' compounds have been introduced, called 'atypical antipsychotics', which have higher efficacy and better tolerability than first-generation neuroleptics. Among them, ziprasidone (ZPR) is currently finding widespread use, and it has also been shown to be active as an augmenter in bipolar disorder therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide the latest information on ZPR, an 'atypical' agent for the pharmacological therapy of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. A literature search has been carried out with the keywords 'ziprasidone', 'schizophrenia', 'psychosis', 'bipolar', 'pharmacokinetics' and 'clinical trials'. In this process, particular attention has been paid to the drug pharmacokinetic characteristics and its safety in clinical use.

EXPERT OPINION

ZPR shares most advantages and disadvantages with other atypical antipsychotics. However, it can be useful for its low tendency to cause metabolic syndrome and hyperprolactinaemia, especially in patients suffering from excess weight, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes or who have suffered from hyperprolactinaemia when using other antipsychotics. However, there are serious doubts as to whether ZPR should be administered to patients suffering from arrhythmias or QTc prolongation, and even more for administration to bipolar patients undergoing polypharmacy with antidepressants.

The psychopharmacology algorithm project at the Harvard South Shore Program: an algorithm for acute mania

This new algorithm for the pharmacotherapy of acute mania was developed by the Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program. The authors conducted a literature search in PubMed and reviewed key studies, other algorithms and guidelines, and their references. Treatments were prioritized considering three main considerations: (1) effectiveness in treating the current episode, (2) preventing potential relapses to depression, and (3) minimizing side effects over the short and long term. The algorithm presupposes that clinicians have made an accurate diagnosis, decided how to manage contributing medical causes (including substance misuse), discontinued antidepressants, and considered the patient's childbearing potential. We propose different algorithms for mixed and nonmixed mania. Patients with mixed mania may be treated first with a second-generation antipsychotic, of which the first choice is quetiapine because of its greater efficacy for depressive symptoms and episodes in bipolar disorder. Valproate and then either lithium or carbamazepine may be added. For nonmixed mania, lithium is the first-line recommendation. A second-generation antipsychotic can be added. Again, quetiapine is favored, but if quetiapine is unacceptable, risperidone is the next choice. Olanzapine is not considered a first-line treatment due to its long-term side effects, but it could be second-line. If the patient, whether mixed or nonmixed, is still refractory to the above medications, then depending on what has already been tried, consider carbamazepine, haloperidol, olanzapine, risperidone, and valproate first tier; aripiprazole, asenapine, and ziprasidone second tier; and clozapine third tier (because of its weaker evidence base and greater side effects). Electroconvulsive therapy may be considered at any point in the algorithm if the patient has a history of positive response or is intolerant of medications.

Koukopoulos׳ diagnostic criteria for mixed depression: a validation study

BACKGROUND

Mixed depression (MxD) is one subtype of depressive experiences within the depressive spectrum. MxD definition is debated among experts. Koukopoulos׳ proposed diagnostic criteria focused primarily on psychic agitation, marked irritability, and intense mood lability as markers of a mixed depressive episode. The present study validates Koukopoulos׳ criteria as diagnostic for MxD.

METHODS

A sample of 435 patients from the International Mood Network (IMN), multi-center, international network of sites, and the Centro LucioBini of Rome was analyzed. Koukopoulos׳ criteria were assessed in all patients.

RESULTS

The most prevalent MxD criteria were "absence of psychomotor retardation" (84%), "mood lability or marked reactivity" (78%), and "psychic agitation or inner tension" (75%). Multivariable predictors of a MxD (+) diagnosis were: higher current CGI (OR=1.23, 95% CI 1.23, 2.84), lower rates of previous bipolar type I diagnosis (OR=0.54, 95% CI -3.28, -0.13), mixed symptoms on the index episode (OR=10.02, 95% CI 2.32, 24.12), rapid cycling course (OR=2.6 95% CI 1.45, 3.56), past substance abuse (OR=3.02, 95% CI 2.01, 5.67) and lower education status (OR=0.44, 95% CI -3.23, -0.98). This model showed a sensitivity of 76.4%, specificity of 86.3%, negative predictive value of 75%, and positive predictive value of 86%.

LIMITATIONS

An external validation of these criteria in an independent sample is warranted.

CONCLUSION

A broad definition of mixed depression was internally validated with multiple diagnostic validators and was sensitively and specifically predicted. Contrary to DSM-5, Koukopoulos׳ broad criteria include agitation, irritability and mood lability as core features.

Clinical decision making in the treatment of mixed states

OBJECTIVES

We reviewed the treatment of bipolar mixed states using efficacy data of licensed and non-licensed physical or pharmacological treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a literature search to identify published studies reporting data on mixed states. Grading was done using an in-house level of evidence and we compared the efficacy with treatment recommendations of mixed states in current bipolar disorder guidelines.

RESULTS

A total of 133 studies reported data on mixed states, and seven guidelines differentiate the acute treatment of mixed states from pure states. The strongest evidence in treating co-occurring manic and depressive symptoms was for monotherapy with aripiprazole, asenapine, extended release carbamazepine, valproate, olanzapine, and ziprasidone. Aripiprazole was recommended in three guidelines, asenapine in one, and carbamazepine and ziprasidone in two. As adjunctive treatment, the strongest evidence of efficacy was for olanzapine plus lithium or valproate. For maintenance, there is evidence for the efficacy of monotherapy with valproate, olanzapine, and quetiapine. In the six guidelines valproate or olanzapine are first line monotherapy options; one recommends quetiapine. Recommended add-on treatments are lithium or valproate plus quetiapine.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of studies designed to address the efficacy of medications in mixed affective symptoms. Guidelines do not fully reflect the current evidences.

Bipolar mixed states: still mixed up?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update regarding the nosological status of, and treatments for, bipolar mixed states.

RECENT FINDINGS

Mixed states are increasingly recognized as relatively common. The nosological approach in DSM-5 reflects a more liberal application of a mixed states specifier to either the depressed or manic pole of bipolar disorder. The presence of mixed features is associated with a worse clinical course and higher rates of comorbidities including substance abuse. There is ongoing debate about the role of antidepressants in the evolution of such states, but there is increasing consensus that the presence of mixed features should preclude the use of antidepressants.

SUMMARY

Clinical vigilance and careful evaluation are required to ensure mixed states are not missed in the clinical context. Atypical antipsychotics are emerging as the medications of choice in the pharmacological management of mixed states. Furthermore, research is required into the aetiogenesis and effective treatment of mixed states.

Mixed features of depression: why DSM-5 is wrong (and so was DSM-IV)

The DSM system has never acknowledged a central position for mixed states; thus, mixed depressions have been almost completely neglected for decades. Now, DSM-5 is proposing diagnostic criteria for depression with mixed features that will lead to more misdiagnosis and inadequate treatment of this syndrome. Different criteria, based on empirically stronger evidence than exists for the DSM-5 criteria, should be adopted.

Mixed states in DSM-5: implications for clinical care, education, and research

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) nomenclature for the co-occurrence of manic and depressive symptoms (mixed states) has been revised in the new DSM-5 version to accommodate a mixed categorical-dimensional concept. The new classification will capture subthreshold non-overlapping symptoms of the opposite pole using a "with mixed features" specifier to be applied to manic episodes in bipolar disorder I (BD I), hypomanic, and major depressive episodes experienced in BD I, BD II, bipolar disorder not otherwise specified, and major depressive disorder. The revision will have a substantial impact in several fields: epidemiology, diagnosis, treatment, research, education, and regulations. The new concept is data-driven and overcomes the problems derived from the extremely narrow definition in the DSM-IV-TR. However, it is unclear how clinicians will deal with the possibility of diagnosing major depression with mixed features and how this may impact the bipolar-unipolar dichotomy and diagnostic reliability. Clinical trials may also need to address treatment effects according to the presence or absence of mixed features. The medications that are effective in treating mixed episodes per the DSM-IV-TR definition may also be effective in treating mixed features per the DSM-5, but new studies are needed to demonstrate it.

Evidence review and clinical guidance for the use of ziprasidone in Canada

While indicated for schizophrenia and acute mania, ziprasidone's evidence base and use in clinical practice extends beyond these regulatory approvals. We, an invited panel of experts led by a working group of 3, critically examined the evidence and our collective experience regarding the effectiveness, tolerability and safety of ziprasidone across its clinical uses. There was no opportunity for manufacturer input into the content of the review. As anticipated, ziprasidone was found to be effective for its indicated uses, although its utility in mania and mixed states lacked comparative data. Beyond these uses, the available data were either unimpressive or were lacking. An attractive characteristic is its neutral effect on weight thereby providing patients with a non-obesogenic long-term treatment option. Key challenges in practice include the need for dosing on a full stomach and managing its early onset adverse effect of restlessness. Addressing these issues are critical to its long-term success.