Ziprasidone plus a mood stabilizer in subjects with bipolar I disorder: a 6-month, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial

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.

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.

Pharmacological Strategies for Bipolar Disorders in Acute Phases and Chronic Management with a Special Focus on Lithium, Valproic Acid, and Atypical Antipsychotics

Bipolar disorders (BDs) are a heterogeneous group of severe affective disorders generally described by the alternation of (hypo)manic, depressive, and mixed phases, with euthymic intervals of variable duration. BDs are burdened with high psychiatric and physical comorbidity, increased suicide risk and reduced life expectancy. In addition, BDs can progress into complicated forms (e.g., mixed states, rapid/irregular cycling), which are more difficult to treat and often require personalized pharmacological combinations. Mood stabilizers, particularly Lithium and Valproic acid (VPA), still represent the cornerstones of both acute and chronic pharmacotherapies of BDs. Lithium is the gold standard in BD-I and BDII with typical features, while VPA seems more effective for atypical forms (e.g., mixed-prevalence and rapid-cycling). However, despite appropriate mood stabilization, many patients show residual symptoms, and more than a half recur within 1-2 years, highlighting the need of additional strategies. Among these, the association of atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) with mood stabilizers is recurrent in the treatment of acute phases, but it is also being growingly explored in the maintenance pharmacotherapy. These combinations are clinically more aggressive and often needed in the acute phases, whereas simplifying pharmacotherapies to mood stabilizers only is preferable in the long-term, whenever possible. When mood stabilizers are not enough for maintenance treatment, Quetiapine and, less consistently, Aripiprazole have been proposed as the most advisable adjunctive strategies, for their safety and tolerability profiles. However, in view of the increased risk of serious adverse effects, a careful patient-centered balance between costs and benefits is mandatory.

Preventing new episodes of bipolar disorder in adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Uncertainty remains regarding the relative efficacy of maintenance pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder (BD), and available data require updating. The present systematic review and meta-analysis aims to consolidate the evidence from the highest quality randomized controlled trials (RCTs) published up to July 2021, overcoming the limitations of earlier reviews. The PubMed and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for double-blind RCTs involving lithium, mood stabilizing anticonvulsants (MSAs), antipsychotics, antidepressants, and other treatments. Rates of new mood episodes with test vs. reference treatments (placebo or alternative active agent) were compared by random-effects meta-analysis. Polarity index was calculated for each treatment type. Eligible trials involved ≥6 months of maintenance follow up. Of 2,158 identified reports, 22 met study eligibility criteria, and involved 7,773 subjects stabilized for 1-12 weeks and followed-up for 24-104 weeks. Psychotropic monotherapy overall (including lithium, MSAs, and second generation antipsychotics (SGA) was more effective in preventing new BD episodes than placebo (odds ratio, OR=0.42; 95% confidence interval, CI 0.34-0.51, p<0.00001). Significantly lower risk of new BD episodes was observed with the following individual drugs: aripiprazole, asenapine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone long-acting (ORs varied 0.19-0.46). Adding aripiprazole, divalproex, quetiapine, or olanzapine/risperidone to lithium or an MSA was more effective compared with lithium or MSA monotherapy (OR=0.37; 95%CI 0.25-0.55, p<0.00001). Active treatment favored prevention of mania over depression. The key limitations were "responder-enriched" design in most trials and high outcomes heterogeneity. PROSPERO registration number is CRD42020162663.

Lithium treatment of Bipolar disorder in adults: A systematic review of randomized trials and meta-analyses

The aim of the study was to systematically review the hard evidence alone, concerning lithium efficacy separately for the phases and clinical facets of Bipolar disorder (BD). The PRISMA method was followed to search the MEDLINE for Randomized Controlled trials, Post-hoc analyses and Meta-analyses and review papers up to August 1st 2020, with the combination of the words 'bipolar', 'manic', 'mania', 'manic depression' and 'manic depressive' and 'randomized'. Trials and meta-analyses concerning the use of lithium either as monotherapy or in combination with other agents in adults were identified concerning acute mania (Ν=64), acute bipolar depression (Ν=78), the maintenance treatment (Ν=73) and the treatment of other issues (N = 93). Treatment guidelines were also identified. Lithium is efficacious for the treatment of acute mania including concomitant psychotic symptoms. In acute bipolar depression it is efficacious only in combination with specific agents. For the maintenance phase, it is efficacious as monotherapy mainly in the prevention of manic while its efficacy for the prevention of depressive episodes is unclear. Its combinations increase its therapeutic value. It is equaly efficacious in rapid and non-rapid cycling patients, in concomitant obsessive-compulsive symptoms, alcohol and substance abuse, the neurocognitive deficit, suicidal ideation and fatigue The current systematic review provided support for the usefulness of lithium against a broad spectrum of clinical issues in Bipolar disorder. Its efficacy is comparable to that of more recently developed agents.

Effects of a conventional mood stabilizer alone or in combination with second-generation antipsychotics on recurrence rate and discontinuation rate in bipolar I disorder in the maintenance phase: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

A systematic review and meta-analysis of double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trials were conducted to examine how soon an increase in recurrence risk could be observed among bipolar I disorder (BDI) patients who were clinically stable with the combination therapy of mood stabilizers with second-generation antipsychotics (SGA+MS) treatment following second-generation antipsychotics discontinuation (i.e., MS alone) compared with SGA+MS maintenance.

METHODS

Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL databases were used for systematic literature searches until May/22/2020. The primary outcome was the recurrence rate of any mood episode at 6 months. The secondary outcomes were the recurrence rates of manic/hypomanic/mixed and depressive episodes and all-cause discontinuation at 6 months. The recurrence rates at 1, 2, 3, 9, and 12 months were also investigated.

RESULTS

Eight studies (mean study duration = 58.25 ± 33.63 weeks) were identified (SGA+MS group [n = 1,456: 3 aripiprazole+MS studies, 1 lurasidone+MS study, 1 olanzapine+MS study, 2 quetiapine+MS studies, 1 ziprasidone+MS study] and placebo+MS group [n = 1,476]). Pooled SGA+MS exhibited lower recurrence rates of any mood episode, manic/hypomanic/mixed episodes, and depressive episodes as well as reduced all-cause discontinuation at every observational point. The risk ratios (95% confidence interval) of the recurrence rate at 6 months were 0.51 (0.39-0.86) for any mood episode, 0.42 (0.30-0.59) for manic/hypomanic/mixed episodes, and 0.39 (0.28-0.54) for depressive episodes. The RR for all-cause discontinuation was 0.67 (0.50-0.89). Both aripiprazole+MS and quetiapine+MS outperformed placebo+MS in the recurrence of any mood, manic/hypomanic/mixed, and depressive episodes at 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

SGA+MS prevented recurrence for up to 12 months for BDI compared with placebo+MS.

Mood stabilizers and/or antipsychotics for bipolar disorder in the maintenance phase: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We searched Embase, PubMed, and CENTRAL from inception until 22 May 2020 to investigate which antipsychotics and/or mood stabilizers are better for patients with bipolar disorder in the maintenance phase. We performed two categorical network meta-analyses. The first included monotherapy studies and studies in which the two drugs used were specified (i.e., aripiprazole, aripiprazole once monthly, aripiprazole+lamotrigine, aripiprazole+valproate, asenapine, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, lamotrigine+valproate, lithium, lithium+oxcarbazepine, lithium+valproate, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine, risperidone long-acting injection, valproate, and placebo). The second included studies on second-generation antipsychotic combination therapies (SGAs) (i.e., aripiprazole, lurasidone, olanzapine, quetiapine, and ziprasidone) with lithium or valproate (LIT/VAL) compared with placebo with LIT/VAL. Outcomes were recurrence/relapse rate of any mood episode (RR-any, primary), depressive episode (RR-dep) and manic/hypomanic/mixed episode (RR-mania), discontinuation, mortality, and individual adverse events. Risk ratios and 95% credible interval were calculated. Forty-one randomized controlled trials were identified (n = 9821; mean study duration, 70.5 ± 36.6 weeks; percent female, 54.1%; mean age, 40.7 years). All active treatments other than carbamazepine, lamotrigine+valproate (no data) and paliperidone outperformed the placebo for RR-any. Aripiprazole+valproate, lamotrigine, lamotrigine+valproate, lithium, olanzapine, and quetiapine outperformed placebo for RR-dep. All active treatments, other than aripiprazole+valproate, carbamazepine, lamotrigine, and lamotrigine+valproate, outperformed placebo for RR-mania. Asenapine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, and valproate outperformed placebo for all-cause discontinuation. All SGAs+LIT/VALs other than olanzapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-any. Lurasidone+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-dep. Aripiprazole+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for RR-mania. Lurasidone+LIT/VAL and quetiapine+LIT/VAL outperformed placebo+LIT/VAL for all-cause discontinuation. Treatment efficacy, tolerability, and safety profiles differed among treatments.

Lithium vs valproate in the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder: A post- hoc analysis of a randomized double-blind placebo-controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Lithium and valproate are commonly used either in monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics in maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder; however, their comparative efficacy is not well understood. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of valproate and lithium on mood stability either in monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics.

METHODS

We performed a post hoc analysis using data from a 52-week randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, that recruited 159 patients with recently remitted mania during treatment with lithium or valproate and adjunctive atypical antipsychotic therapy. Patients were randomized to discontinue adjunctive atypical antipsychotic at 0, 24 or 52 weeks.

RESULTS

No significant differences in efficacy were observed between valproate and lithium (hazard ratio: 0.99; 95% confidence interval: [0.66, 1.48]) in time to any mood event. Valproate with 24 weeks of atypical antipsychotic was significantly superior to valproate monotherapy in preventing any mood relapse (hazard ratio: 0.46; 95% confidence interval: [0.22, 0.97]) while lithium with 24 weeks of atypical antipsychotic was superior to lithium monotherapy in preventing mania (hazard ratio: 0.27; 95% confidence interval: [0.09, 0.85]) but not depression.

CONCLUSION

Overall, this study did not find significant differences in efficacy between the two mood-stabilizing agents when used as monotherapy or in combination with atypical antipsychotics. However, study design and small sample size might have precluded from detecting an effect if true difference in efficacy existed. Further head-to-head investigations with stratified designs are needed to evaluate maintenance therapies.

Correlation between white blood cell count and mood-stabilising treatment response in two bipolar disorder trials

BACKGROUND

Immune system markers may predict affective disorder treatment response, but whether an overall immune system marker predicts bipolar disorder treatment effect is unclear.

METHODS

Bipolar CHOICE (N = 482) and LiTMUS (N = 283) were similar comparative effectiveness trials treating patients with bipolar disorder for 24 weeks with four different treatment arms (standard-dose lithium, quetiapine, moderate-dose lithium plus optimised personalised treatment (OPT) and OPT without lithium). We performed secondary mixed effects linear regression analyses adjusted for age, gender, smoking and body mass index to investigate relationships between pre-treatment white blood cell (WBC) levels and clinical global impression scale (CGI) response.

RESULTS

Compared to participants with WBC counts of 4.5-10 × 109/l, participants with WBC &lt; 4.5 or WBC ≥ 10 showed similar improvement within each specific treatment arm and in gender-stratified analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

An overall immune system marker did not predict differential treatment response to four different treatment approaches for bipolar disorder all lasting 24 weeks.

Complex Combination Pharmacotherapy for Bipolar Disorder: Knowing When Less Is More or More Is Better

Combination pharmacotherapy for bipolar disorder is commonplace and often reflects the severity and complexity of the illness and the comorbid conditions frequently associated with it. Across treatment settings, about one-fifth of patients with bipolar disorder appear to receive four or more psychotropic medications. Practice patterns often outpace the evidence-based literature, insofar as few systematic studies have examined the efficacy and safety of two or more medications for any given phase of illness. Most randomized trials of combination pharmacotherapy focus on the utility of pairing a mood stabilizer with a second-generation antipsychotic for prevention of either acute mania or relapse. In real-world practice, patients with bipolar disorder often take more elaborate combinations of mood stabilizers, antipsychotics, antidepressants, anxiolytics, stimulants, and other psychotropics for indefinite periods that do not necessarily arise purposefully and logically. In this article, I identify clinical factors associated with complex combination pharmacotherapy for patients with bipolar disorder; describe approaches to ensuring that each component of a treatment regimen has a defined role; discuss the elimination of unnecessary, ineffective, or redundant drugs in a regimen; and address complementary, safe, rationale-based drug combinations that target specific domains of psychopathology for which monotherapies often provide inadequate benefit.

Personalized Pharmacotherapy for Bipolar Disorder: How to Tailor Findings From Randomized Trials to Individual Patient-Level Outcomes

The quest for "personalized medicine" in psychiatry has focused mainly on pursuing potential biomarkers such as pharmacogenetic predictors of drug response. However, the collective randomized trial database across phases of bipolar disorder allows one to identify clinical characteristics that inform the likelihood of desired treatment outcomes. In turn, those characteristics, termed moderators and mediators of drug response, enable those who administer treatment to construct clinical profiles that can help them tailor pharmacotherapies to the features of a given patient rather than simply to an overall diagnosis. Bipolar disorder typically involves more heterogeneous than uniform clinical presentations, partly because of its highly prevalent psychiatric and medical comorbid conditions. Further clinical diversity arises from characteristics such as bipolar I versus II disorder subtype, rapid cycling, mixed versus pure affective episodes, psychosis, anxiety, chronicity, cognitive dysfunction, and suicidality, among other distinguishing features. By coupling such profiles with an awareness of the psychotropic breadth of spectrum held by particular medications, clinicians can devise strategic combination therapy regimens, capitalizing on synergies and using drugs that exert multiple relevant effects, addressing comorbid conditions, incorporating medications that could offset adverse effects of other agents, and avoiding or deprescribing medication options that lack known evidence to target symptoms within the clinical profile of a given patient.

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.

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.

Effectiveness of maintenance therapy of lithium vs other mood stabilizers in monotherapy and in combinations: a systematic review of evidence from observational studies

OBJECTIVES

For the first time to present a systematic review of observational studies on the efficiency of lithium monotherapy in comparison with other maintenance mood stabilizers in monotherapy and in combination.

METHODS

As part of the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Task Force on Lithium Treatment, we undertook a systematic literature search of non-randomized controlled observational studies on (i) lithium monotherapy vs treatment with another maintenance mood stabilizer in monotherapy and (ii) lithium in combination with other mood stabilizers vs monotherapy.

RESULTS

In eight out of nine identified studies including a total of < 14 000 patients, maintenance lithium monotherapy was associated with improved outcome compared with another mood stabilizer in monotherapy, including valproate, lamotrigine, olanzapine, quetiapine, unspecified anticonvulsants, carbamazepine/lamotrigine, unspecified atypical antipsychotics and unspecified antipsychotics. Among the four identified studies including a total of > 4000 patients comparing maintenance combination therapy with maintenance monotherapy, a few combination therapies were found to be superior to monotherapy in some analyses, but many were not.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show the superiority in real life of lithium monotherapy compared with monotherapy with other maintenance mood stabilizers. The four largest register-based studies largely addressed confounding, but, as ever, residual confounding cannot be excluded. Nevertheless, the observational findings substantially add to the findings from randomized controlled trials, whose designs often limit the validity of comparison between medicines.

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.

An overview of pharmacotherapy for bipolar I disorder

INTRODUCTION

Bipolar I disorder (BD I) is complex with a chronic course that significantly impacts a sufferer's quality of life. As of right now, there are many available treatments that aim to rapidly treat manic or depressive episodes and stabilize mood. The purpose of this report is to provide an up-to-date comprehensive review of the available evidence-based trials of pharmacotherapy for the treatment of BD I.

AREAS COVERED

This paper reviews randomized active comparator-controlled or placebo-controlled trials evaluating the use of current pharmacotherapy in adults with BD I from phase III to clinical practice. Monotherapy and combination therapy for acute and long-term treatment were reviewed for this purpose.

EXPERT OPINION

There are many treatments available for BD mania; however, the depressive and stabilization phases of the illness remain a clinical challenge. Unfortunately, randomized controlled trials do not represent 'real world' patients, as their strict inclusion and exclusion criteria do not allow for different features sometimes present in patients to be considered. Research efforts must also focus on treating cognitive deficits, which adds to lower functional outcome. The authors believe that there is dire need for new, more targeted treatments in BD I, with a critical view of the side effects.

Lurasidone in combination with lithium or valproate for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder

Lurasidone (DS-RAn) has demonstrated efficacy in the acute treatment of bipolar depression, both as monotherapy, and as combination therapy with lithium or valproate. To evaluate the recurrence prevention efficacy of lurasidone for the maintenance treatment of bipolar I disorder, patients received up to 20 weeks of open-label lurasidone (20-80mg/d) combined with lithium or valproate during an initial stabilization phase. A total of 496 patients met stabilization criteria and were randomized to 28 weeks of double-blind treatment with lurasidone (20-80mg/d) or placebo, in combination with lithium or valproate. Based on a Cox proportional hazard model, treatment with lurasidone reduced the probability of recurrence of any mood episode by 29% (primary endpoint), however, the reduction did not achieve statistical significance. Probability of recurrence on lurasidone was significantly lower in patients with an index episode of depression (HR, 0.57; P=0.039), in patients with any index episode who were not rapid-cycling (HR, 0.69; P=0.046), and when recurrence was based on MADRS, YMRS, or CGI-BP-S severity criteria (HR, 0.53; P=0.025; sensitivity analysis). Long-term treatment with lurasidone combined with lithium or valproate was found to be safe and well-tolerated, with minimal effects on weight or metabolic parameters.

Maintenance therapy with second generation antipsychotics for bipolar disorder - A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Second generations antipsychotics (SGA) are frequently used for maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder. We systematically reviewed the efficacy and long-term effects of treatment with SGA, regardless of treatment strategy (SGA administered either as monotherapy or as adjunctive therapy), in comparison to placebo, lithium or valproate. Primary outcomes were relapses (mood episode recurrence) and discontinuation.

METHOD

Clinical studies were identified through database searching in PubMed, Embase, PsychInfo and Cochrane Library and critically appraised based on the Cochrane Handbook. Full data extraction of raw data was performed and analyzed with meta-analyses, and level of evidence graded using GRADE. Only randomized controlled studies (RCT) and observational studies were included, with a minimum follow-up of 6 months. Comparators used were restricted to placebo, lithium, valproate or other anti-epileptic drugs.

RESULTS

We identified 15 RCTs on SGA in bipolar disorder with follow-up-time of 6 months up to 2 years, and one observational study reporting long-term effects of up to 4 years. A total of 6142 patients were included in the randomized trials. No long-term RCTs beyond 2 years follow-up was identified. All RCTs except for one included patients with bipolar disorder type I only. All RCTs except for two included patients pre-stabilized on the drug under investigation prior to randomization (enrichment design). For SGA as adjunctive therapy to lithium or valproate, meta-analyses showed that treatment with either aripiprazole (RR: 0.65, 95% CI 0.50-0.85), quetiapine (RR: 0.38, 95% CI 0.32-0.46) or ziprasidone (RR: 0.62, 95% CI 0.40-0.96) reduced the overall risk of relapses in patients that had responded during the stabilization phase. Adjunctive therapy with quetiapine was the only drug that reduced both manic and depressive episodes. For SGA as monotherapy, only quetiapine was shown to be better than lithium/ valproate for both manic and depressive relapses, but only for patients stabilized on quetiapine during the acute phase. As monotherapy, olanzapine, quetiapine and risperidone were shown to be superior to placebo in reducing the overall risk of relapses.

LIMITATIONS

There were considerable limitations to the evidence base of maintenance treatment with SGA in bipolar disorder. Most studies used stabilized patients, i.e. enrichment design (selection bias), had considerable dropout levels (attrition bias), and variable degree of reporting bias. No long-term RCT data on efficacy is available beyond 2 years, and almost all studies are on bipolar disorder type I patients only. Despite these limitations, we elucidate quantitative findings from meta-analyses conducted on the randomized trials published on the topic.

White blood cell count correlates with mood symptom severity and specific mood symptoms in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Immune alterations may play a role in bipolar disorder etiology; however, the relationship between overall immune system functioning and mood symptom severity is unknown.

METHODS

The two comparative effectiveness trials, the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder Study (Bipolar CHOICE) and the Lithium Treatment Moderate-Dose Use Study (LiTMUS), were similar trials among patients with bipolar disorder. At study entry, white blood cell count and bipolar mood symptom severity (via Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale and Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale) were assessed. We performed analysis of variance and linear regression analyses to investigate relationships between deviations from median white blood cell and multinomial regression analysis between higher and lower white blood cell levels. All analyses were adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, smoking, diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia.

RESULTS

Among 482 Bipolar CHOICE participants, for each 1.0 × 10⁹/L white blood cell deviation, the overall Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale severity increased significantly among men (coefficient = 2.13; 95% confidence interval = [0.46, -3.79]; p = 0.013), but not among women (coefficient = 0.87; 95% confidence interval = [-0.87, -2.61]; p = 0.33). Interaction analyses showed a trend toward greater Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale symptom severity among men (coefficient = 1.51; 95% confidence interval = [-0.81, -3.82]; p = 0.2). Among 283 LiTMUS participants, higher deviation from the median white blood cell showed a trend toward higher Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale scores among men (coefficient = 1.33; 95% confidence interval = [-0.22, -2.89]; p = 0.09), but not among women (coefficient = 0.34; 95% confidence interval = [-0.64, -1.32]; p = 0.50). When combining LiTMUS and Bipolar CHOICE, Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale scores increased significantly among men (coefficient = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = [0.31, -1.87]; p = 0.006) for each 1.0 × 10⁹/L white blood cell deviation, whereas we found a weak association among women (coefficient = 0.55; 95% confidence interval = [-0.20, -1.29]; p = 0.14). Lower and higher white blood cell levels correlated with greater symptom severity and specific symptoms, varying according to gender.

CONCLUSION

Deviations in an overall immune system marker, even within the normal white blood cell range, correlated with mood symptom severity in bipolar disorder, mostly among males. Studies are warranted investigating whether white blood cell count may predict response to mood-stabilizing treatment.

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.

The International College of Neuro-Psychopharmacology (CINP) Treatment Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder in Adults (CINP-BD-2017), Part 2: Review, Grading of the Evidence, and a Precise Algorithm

Background

The current paper includes a systematic search of the literature, a detailed presentation of the results, and a grading of treatment options in terms of efficacy and tolerability/safety.

Material and Methods

The PRISMA method was used in the literature search with the combination of the words 'bipolar,' 'manic,' 'mania,' 'manic depression,' and 'manic depressive' with 'randomized,' and 'algorithms' with 'mania,' 'manic,' 'bipolar,' 'manic-depressive,' or 'manic depression.' Relevant web pages and review articles were also reviewed.

Results

The current report is based on the analysis of 57 guideline papers and 531 published papers related to RCTs, reviews, posthoc, or meta-analysis papers to March 25, 2016. The specific treatment options for acute mania, mixed episodes, acute bipolar depression, maintenance phase, psychotic and mixed features, anxiety, and rapid cycling were evaluated with regards to efficacy. Existing treatment guidelines were also reviewed. Finally, Tables reflecting efficacy and recommendation levels were created that led to the development of a precise algorithm that still has to prove its feasibility in everyday clinical practice.

Conclusions

A systematic literature search was conducted on the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder to identify all relevant random controlled trials pertaining to all aspects of bipolar disorder and graded the data according to a predetermined method to develop a precise treatment algorithm for management of various phases of bipolar disorder. It is important to note that the some of the recommendations in the treatment algorithm were based on the secondary outcome data from posthoc analyses.

C-reactive protein: A differential biomarker for major depressive disorder and bipolar II disorder

Objectives We aimed to examine whether the C-reactive protein (CRP) level could be used to differentiate between major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar II disorder (BD II). Methods Ninety-six healthy controls, 88 BD II and 72 MDD drug-naïve patients in their major depressive episodes were enrolled. The fasting plasma level of high-sensitivity CRP was assessed at baseline and after treatment. Results The BD II patients presented significantly higher 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) scores and CRP levels at baseline when adjustment for age, gender, and body mass index (P <  0.001 and P <  0.001, respectively). After treatment the CRP levels remained significantly different (P <  0.001), although the HDRS score was not significantly different between the BD II and MDD patients. A receiver-operating characteristic analysis showed that a baseline CRP level of 621.6 ng/mL could discriminate between BD II and MDD, with an area under the curve of 0.816 and a sensitivity and specificity of 0.699 and 0.882, respectively. Furthermore, the baseline CRP level greater than 621.6 ng/ml had 28.2 higher odds of a diagnosis of BD II (P <  0.001, 95% confidence interval: 10.96-72.35). Conclusions The level of CRP plays a role of biomarker to differentiate between MDD and BD II depression in both their depressed and euthymic state.

Optimal duration of risperidone or olanzapine adjunctive therapy to mood stabilizer following remission of a manic episode: A CANMAT randomized double-blind trial

Atypical antipsychotic adjunctive therapy to lithium or valproate is effective in treating acute mania. Although continuation of atypical antipsychotic adjunctive therapy after mania remission reduces relapse of mood episodes, the optimal duration is unknown. As many atypical antipsychotics cause weight gain and metabolic syndrome, they should not be continued unless the benefits outweigh the risks. This 52-week double-blind placebo-controlled trial recruited patients with bipolar I disorder (n=159) who recently remitted from a manic episode during treatment with risperidone or olanzapine adjunctive therapy to lithium or valproate. Patients were randomized to one of three conditions: discontinuation of risperidone or olanzapine and substitution with placebo at (i) entry ('0-weeks' group) or (ii) at 24 weeks after entry ('24-weeks' group) or (iii) continuation of risperidone or olanzapine for the full duration of the study ('52-weeks' group). The primary outcome measure was time to relapse of any mood episode. Compared with the 0-weeks group, the time to any mood episode was significantly longer in the 24-weeks group (hazard ratio (HR) 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.33, 0.86) and nearly so in the 52-weeks group (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.39, 1.02). The relapse rate was similar in the 52-weeks group compared with the 24-weeks group (HR: 1.18; 95% CI: 0.71, 1.99); however, sub-group analysis showed discordant results between the two antipsychotics (HR: 0.48, 95% CI: 0.17; 1.32 olanzapine patients; HR: 1.85, 95% CI: 1.00, 3.41 risperidone patients). Average weight gain was 3.2 kg in the 52-weeks group compared with a weight loss of 0.2 kg in the 0-weeks and 0.1 kg in the 24-weeks groups. These findings suggest that risperidone or olanzapine adjunctive therapy for 24 weeks is beneficial but continuation of risperidone beyond this period does not reduce the risk of relapse. Whether continuation of olanzapine beyond this period reduces relapse risk remains unclear but the potential benefit needs to be weighed against an increased risk of weight gain.

Evidence-based guidelines for treating bipolar disorder: Revised third edition recommendations from the British Association for Psychopharmacology

The British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines specify the scope and targets of treatment for bipolar disorder. The third version is based explicitly on the available evidence and presented, like previous Clinical Practice Guidelines, as recommendations to aid clinical decision making for practitioners: it may also serve as a source of information for patients and carers, and assist audit. The recommendations are presented together with a more detailed review of the corresponding evidence. A consensus meeting, involving experts in bipolar disorder and its treatment, reviewed key areas and considered the strength of evidence and clinical implications. The guidelines were drawn up after extensive feedback from these participants. The best evidence from randomized controlled trials and, where available, observational studies employing quasi-experimental designs was used to evaluate treatment options. The strength of recommendations has been described using the GRADE approach. The guidelines cover the diagnosis of bipolar disorder, clinical management, and strategies for the use of medicines in short-term treatment of episodes, relapse prevention and stopping treatment. The use of medication is integrated with a coherent approach to psychoeducation and behaviour change.

Hyperprolactinemia and medications for bipolar disorder: systematic review of a neglected issue in clinical practice

Drug-induced changes in serum prolactin (sPrl) levels constitute a relevant issue due to the potentially severe consequences on physical health of psychiatric patients such as sexual dysfunctions, osteoporosis and Prl-sensitive tumors. Several drugs have been associated to sPrl changes. Only antipsychotics have been extensively studied as sPrl-elevating agents in schizophrenia, but the extent to which bipolar disorder (BD) treatments affect sPrl levels is much less known. The objective of this systematic review is to summarize the evidence of the effects of drugs used in BD on Prl. This review followed the PRISMA statement. The MEDLINE/PubMed/Index Medicus, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases were systematically searched for articles in English appearing from any time to May 30, 2014. Twenty-six studies were included. These suggest that treatments for BD are less likely to be associated with Prl elevations, with valproate, quetiapine, lurasidone, mirtazapine, and bupropion reported not to change PRL levels significantly and lithium and aripiprazole to lower them in some studies. Taking into account the effects of the different classes of drugs on Prl may improve the care of BD patients requiring long-term pharmacotherapy. Based on the results of this review, lithium and valproate appear to be safer due to their low potential to elevate sPrL; among antipsychotics, quetiapine, lurasidone and aripiprazole appear to be similarly safe.

Pharmacotherapy of acute mania: monotherapy or combination therapy with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics?

The use of combination therapy with mood stabilizers and antipsychotics in acute mania in bipolar disorder (BD) is widespread, although most treatment guidelines recommend monotherapy as the first option, and reserve combination therapy, which is associated with more frequent and more severe side effects, for when patients do not respond to the former treatment option. Reasons to prescribe combination therapy include the lack of efficacy of the current treatment (either real or due to undisclosed poor adherence), psychiatric comorbidities, severe previous course of illness, slow cross-tapering during treatment switching, and potential benefits from particular combinations. The decision to start with monotherapy or combination therapy may depend on the patient characteristics, and is still under debate. Clinical trials designed to ascertain whether combination therapy or monotherapy is more advantageous for patients in acute mania and beyond, according to illness severity, are urgently needed. Adding a third monotherapy arm to the conventional two-arm, adjunctive-design trials or initiating combination therapy from the beginning may help to shed some light on the issue.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Safety and tolerability of anticonvulsant medication in bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Anticonvulsants (AC) are widely used and recommended as a treatment option in different phases of bipolar disorder (BD). In contrast to ample evidence for efficacy in acute mania, there is generally less unambiguous evidence for maintenance treatment or bipolar depression, and data on long-term tolerability in BD are sparse, although this varies greatly between different compounds. This review summarizes the clinically relevant tolerability and safety profile of ACs commonly used for the treatment of BD based on findings from randomized controlled trials (RCT).

AREAS COVERED

Systematic search of the English literature between January 1991 and May 2015 revealed a total of nine RCTs investigating valproate, five RCTs with carbamazepine and 8 with lamotrigine For these ACs we found information on side effect profiles for both acute and maintenance RCTs, albeit of varying quality, whereas for topiramate (five RCTs), gabapentin and esclicarbazepine acetate (one RCT each) only acute treatment RCTs have been published. Descriptive side effect profiles from open-label studies exist for several other ACs rarely used in BD, and are included in this review as a brief narrative chapter.

EXPERT OPINION

Whereas both valproate and carbamazepine are associated with, in part, severe adverse events, lamotrigine emerges as a relatively safe and well tolerated treatment option, especially in maintenance treatment and prevention of depressive relapse in BD. Lack of proven efficacy and side effect profile of other, less rigorously studied ACs restricts their use only to very selected BD cases.

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.

Evaluation of the potential for a pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction between armodafinil and ziprasidone in healthy adults

BACKGROUND

Armodafinil has been studied as adjunctive therapy for major depressive episodes associated with bipolar I disorder. This open-label, single-centre, 2-period study evaluated the effect of armodafinil, a moderate inducer of cytochrome-P450 (CYP) isoenzyme CYP3A4, on the pharmacokinetics and safety of ziprasidone, an atypical antipsychotic used to treat bipolar I disorder and metabolized in part by CYP3A4.

METHODS

Thirty-five healthy subjects received ziprasidone (20 mg) alone and after armodafinil pretreatment (titrated to 250 mg/day); of those, 25 were evaluable for pharmacokinetics. Pharmacokinetic parameters were derived from plasma concentrations of ziprasidone collected prior to and over the 48 h after each ziprasidone administration. Plasma concentrations of armodafinil and its circulating metabolites, R-modafinil acid and modafinil sulfone, were also obtained after repeated daily dosing of armodafinil alone. Safety and tolerability were assessed.

RESULTS

Systemic exposure to ziprasidone was similar following administration alone or after pretreatment with armodafinil, as assessed by mean peak plasma concentration (C max, 52.1 vs 50.4 ng/mL) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-∞, 544.6 vs 469.1 ng·h/mL). Geometric mean ratios of systemic exposure (ziprasidone alone: ziprasidone after pretreatment with armodafinil) were close to unity, with associated 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) within the range of 0.80-1.25 (C max, 0.97; 90 % CI, 0.87-1.08; AUC0-∞, 0.86; 90 % CI, 0.82-0.91). Adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of each agent.

CONCLUSION

Systemic exposure to ziprasidone was not affected by pretreatment with armodafinil. Both drugs were generally safe and well tolerated under the conditions studied.

Clinical and regulatory implications of active run-in phases in long-term studies for bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

The integration of new treatments into the market and routine clinical practice should be dependent on robustness of evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We assessed study designs of long-term studies for bipolar disorder of all second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the completeness of evidence submitted to the regulatory agency.

METHOD

Systematic review of double-blind RCTs comparing SGAs with placebo or active drugs in adults. FDA website and electronic databases were searched until July 2013.

RESULTS

Six placebo-controlled trials comparing aripiprazole, olanzapine, quetiapine and ziprasidone were found in the FDA website. Electronic searches found four additional RCTs about aripiprazole, olanzapine or quetiapine. All RCTs (either submitted to FDA or not) selected patients who responded to acute treatment to increase the treatment effect observed in the long-term phase (enrichment design). By contrast, in the prescribing information sheets for all SGAs, the reported indication was 'maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder'.

CONCLUSION

Extrapolation of results from enrichment studies to the more general population of patients should be carried out cautiously because average treatment benefits are likely to be less in unselected patients. Clear guidance for regulatory submission of RCTs is needed.

Clinical implications of predominant polarity and the polarity index in bipolar disorder: a naturalistic study

OBJECTIVE

Predominant polarity (PP) is an important variable in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This study aimed at determining the role of polarity index (PI), a metric indicating antimanic versus antidepressive prophylactic potential of drugs, in clinical decision-making.

METHOD

Two hundred and fifty-seven of 604 (43%) of patients with BD-I or II fulfilled criteria for manic (MPP) or depressive PP (DPP). The PI, representing the ratio of number needed to treat (NNT) for depression prevention to NNT for mania prevention, was calculated for patients' current treatment. MPP and DPP groups were compared regarding sociodemographic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics.

RESULTS

One hundred and forty-three patients (55.6%) fulfilled criteria for DPP and 114 (44.4%) for MPP. Total PI, Antipsychotics' PI, and mood stabilizers PI were higher, indicating a stronger antimanic action, in MPP. MPP presented higher prevalence of BD-I, male gender, younger age, age at onset and at first hospitalization, more hospitalizations, primary substance misuse, and psychotic symptoms. DP correlated with BD-II, depressive onset, primary life events, melancholia, and suicide attempts.

CONCLUSION

The results confirm the usefulness of the PI. In this large sample, clinical differences among these groups justify differential treatment approach. The PI appears to be a useful operationalization of what clinicians do for maintenance therapy in BD.

Using comparative effectiveness design to improve the generalizability of bipolar treatment trials data: contrasting LiTMUS baseline data with pre-existing placebo controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Efficacy-based double-blind placebo controlled trials were conducted to establish efficacy and safety for FDA approval. Such designs allowed and encouraged the use of exclusion criteria to improve assay sensitivity and internal validity. The LiTMUS trial increased the representation of real-world individuals with bipolar disorder despite the acknowledgment that this compromises assay sensitivity.

METHOD

To maximize generalizability, LiTMUS used broad inclusion and narrow exclusion criteria: participants experiencing mood symptoms of sufficient intensity (at least with a CGI-BP ≥ 3) that would warrant a change in treatment, and that lithium treatment would be a reasonable therapeutic option if they were randomized to it. At baseline demographic, illness, clinical, and treatment characteristics were collected. The LiTMUS study design and baseline sociodemographic data were compared to previous efficacy studies.

RESULTS

As compared to the previous bipolar disorder efficacy studies, LiTMUS participants were of similar age, gender, weight and illness severity; however LiTMUS participants were more racially and ethnically representative of the general population, had a greater number of mood episodes in the past 12 months, more Axis I/II comorbidity, a greater number of prior suicide attempts, and higher functional capacity.

CONCLUSIONS

LiTMUS was a comparative effectiveness trial that had broad inclusion and minimal exclusion criteria that produced a more representative sample comprised of real-world participants. This design enables the results of the LiTMUS study to be a more representative of real world pharmacotherapuetic outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include possible selection bias, paucity of sociodemographic data in efficacy trials, and lack of a placebo.

Is the combination of a mood stabilizer plus an antipsychotic more effective than mono-therapies in long-term treatment of bipolar disorder? A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Bipolar Disorder (BD) long-term treatment is aimed to prevent relapses associated with worsening cognitive impairment and chronicity. Available mood stabilizers, including lithium, fail to prevent relapses in about 40% of bipolar patients. Purpose of the present paper is to review the available data about the efficacy and tolerability of mood stabilizer plus antipsychotic combined treatments.

METHOD

A research in the main database sources has been conducted to obtain an overview about the efficacy and tolerability of the combination of a mood stabilizer plus an antipsychotic in the long-term treatment of BD. Papers with different methodologies but having relapse prevention as main outcome have been included.

RESULTS

Despite the heterogeneity of studies in terms of methodology, almost all papers reported a major efficacy of combined treatments respect to mood stabilizer mono-therapies but lower tolerability. The antipsychotic that presents more evidence of efficacy in combination with mood stabilizers is quetiapine.

DISCUSSION

Combined treatments can be a valid option to improve relapse prevention in BD. However, the higher risk for side effects has to be taken into account and specific combinations should be preferred according to patients' medical comorbidity.

Maintenance treatment with quetiapine when combined with either lithium or divalproex in bipolar I disorder: analysis of two large randomized, placebo-controlled trials

BACKGROUND

To determine the efficacy and safety of quetiapine combined with lithium or divalproex for preventing mood events in patients with bipolar I disorder. In this pooled analysis of two similar long-term studies (D1447C00126 [NCT00107731] and D1447C00127 [NCT00081380]), lithium and divalproex treatment groups were analyzed separately.

METHODS

Patients received open-label quetiapine (400-800 mg/d) plus lithium or divalproex to achieve ≥12 weeks of clinical stability before being randomized to double-blind combination treatment with quetiapine (400-800 mg/d) or placebo plus lithium or divalproex for up to 104 weeks. The primary endpoint was time to first mood event postrandomization following open stabilization.

RESULTS

Of 3,414 patients in the stabilization phase, 1,326 were randomized. There were no differences in the risk of recurrence of mood, mania, or depression between quetiapine plus lithium or quetiapine plus divalproex. Among patients co-treated with placebo and lithium, the risk of recurrence of a mania event was significantly higher than among patients co-treated with placebo and divalproex. In patients with an index episode of mania, placebo plus lithium was associated with a significantly higher risk of recurrence of a mania event than placebo plus divalproex. Safety data were generally consistent with recognized safety profiles.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with bipolar I disorder previously stabilized on quetiapine and lithium or divalproex, maintenance therapy with quetiapine significantly increased the time to recurrence of a mood event (mania or depression) versus placebo, regardless of whether it was combined with lithium or divalproex.

Intracellular pathways of antipsychotic combined therapies: implication for psychiatric disorders treatment

Dysfunctions in the interplay among multiple neurotransmitter systems have been implicated in the wide range of behavioral, emotional and cognitive symptoms displayed by major psychiatric disorders, such as schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or major depression. The complex clinical presentation of these pathologies often needs the use of multiple pharmacological treatments, in particular (1) when monotherapy provides insufficient improvement of the core symptoms; (2) when there are concurrent additional symptoms requiring more than one class of medication and (3) in order to improve tolerability, by using two compounds below their individual dose thresholds to limit side effects. To date, the choice of drug combinations is based on empirical paradigm guided by clinical response. Nonetheless, several preclinical studies have demonstrated that drugs commonly used to treat psychiatric disorders may impact common intracellular target molecules (e.g. Akt/GSK-3 pathway, MAP kinases pathway, postsynaptic density proteins). These findings support the hypothesis that convergence at crucial steps of transductional pathways could be responsible for synergistic effects obtained in clinical practice by the co-administration of those apparently heterogeneous pharmacological compounds. Here we review the most recent evidence on the molecular crossroads in antipsychotic combined therapies with antidepressants, mood stabilizers, and benzodiazepines, as well as with antipsychotics. We first discuss clinical clues and efficacy of such combinations. Then we focus on the pharmacodynamics and on the intracellular pathways underpinning the synergistic, or concurrent, effects of each therapeutic add-on strategy, as well as we also critically appraise how pharmacological research may provide new insights on the putative molecular mechanisms underlying major psychiatric disorders.

Pharmacological management of bipolar depression: acute treatment, maintenance, and prophylaxis

Although the most distinctive clinical feature of bipolar disorder is the pathologically elevated mood, it does not usually constitute the prevalent mood state of bipolar illness. The majority of patients with bipolar disorder spend much more time in depressive episodes, including subsyndromal depressive symptoms, and bipolar depression accounts for the largest part of the morbidity and mortality of the illness. The pharmacological treatment of bipolar depression mostly consists of combinations of at least two drugs, including mood stabilizers (lithium and anticonvulsants), atypical antipsychotics, and antidepressants. Antidepressants are the most frequently prescribed drugs, but recommendations from evidence-based guidelines are not conclusive and do not overtly support their use. Among antidepressants, best evidence exists for fluoxetine, but in combination with olanzapine. Although some guidelines recommend the use of selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors or bupropion in combination with antimanic agents as first-choice treatment, others do not, based on the available evidence. Among anticonvulsants, the use of lamotrigine is overall recommended as a first-line choice, but acute monotherapy studies have failed. Valproate is generally mentioned as a second-line treatment. Lithium monotherapy is also suggested by most guidelines as a first-line treatment, but its efficacy in acute use is not totally clear. Amongst atypical antipsychotics, quetiapine, in monotherapy or as adjunctive treatment, is recommended by most guidelines as a first-line choice. Olanzapine monotherapy is also suggested by some guidelines and is approved in Japan. Armodafinil, pramipexole, ketamine, and lurasidone are recent proposals. Long-term treatment in bipolar disorder is strongly recommended, but guidelines do not recommend the use of antidepressants as a maintenance treatment. Lithium, lamotrigine, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, and aripiprazole are the recommended first-line maintenance options.

The use of antipsychotics in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder

Antipsychotics are often used in the treatment of the acute phase of bipolar disorder; however, once the acute phase has resolved and patients enter the maintenance phase, there is some debate as to whether or not to continue the antipsychotic. This article reviews studies examining the use of antipsychotics in the maintenance phase of bipolar disorder.

Investigation into the long-term metabolic effects of aripiprazole adjunctive to lithium, valproate, or lamotrigine

BACKGROUND

Bipolar I disorder (BPD) patients are often overweight or obese, and likely to have metabolic syndrome. Several medications used to treat BPD are associated with increased body weight and/or worsening metabolic parameters.

METHODS

Metabolic data were analyzed from two efficacy studies of aripiprazole plus the mood stabilizers, lithium/valproate (Study CN138-189), or lamotrigine (Study CN138-392), in the long-term treatment (52 weeks) of BPD. Changes in body weight, individual metabolic parameters, and incidence of metabolic syndrome were assessed.

RESULTS

In the lithium/valproate study, modest increases in body weight were observed at Week 52 in both groups: 1.7 ± 0.8 kg in the lithium/valproate group, and 1.6 ± 0.7 kg in the adjunctive aripiprazole group; this difference was nonsignificant. In the lamotrigine study, decreases in body weight were observed at Week 52 with lamotrigine alone (-2.2 ± 1.0 kg), whereas a modest increase was observed when combined with aripiprazole (0.4 ± 1.0 kg). In both studies, rates of metabolic syndrome at 52 weeks did not increase from baseline with aripiprazole, and median changes from baseline in individual metabolic syndrome parameters were similar with both mood stabilizer monotherapy and the addition of aripiprazole as an adjunctive therapy.

LIMITATIONS

This was a post-hoc analysis, and a low percentage of patients completed the lamotrigine study.

CONCLUSIONS

Aripiprazole plus a mood stabilizer has minimal impact on metabolic changes in predominantly overweight/obese BPD patients over a 52-week period. In both studies, modest mean increases in weight with the addition of aripiprazole were not accompanied by increased rates of metabolic syndrome or changes in metabolic parameters.

Efficacy of aripiprazole versus placebo as adjuncts to lithium or valproate in relapse prevention of manic or mixed episodes in bipolar I patients stratified by index manic or mixed episode

BACKGROUND

Differences in response to treatment have been observed for bipolar disorder (BPD) patients with manic or mixed episodes. This post-hoc analysis examined the maintenance effect of aripiprazole in combination with lithium or valproate in subpopulations of patients entering a relapse prevention study with either manic or mixed bipolar episodes.

METHODS

A long-term relapse prevention study of BPD patients with manic or mixed episodes included a single-blind stabilization phase, in which patients were stabilized with single-blind aripiprazole plus lithium or valproate (maintaining stability for 12 weeks), and a double-blind relapse assessment phase, where patients were randomized to aripiprazole or placebo plus lithium or valproate for up to 52 weeks. Lithium and valproate groups were pooled.

RESULTS

The time to relapse of any mood episode was longer in the adjunctive aripiprazole group versus the lithium/valproate monotherapy group for the manic (p<0.01) but not mixed population (p=0.59). The LOCF analysis indicated a significantly greater reduction in YMRS total score from baseline with continued aripiprazole versus placebo at 52 weeks in both manic (treatment difference=-3.32, p<0.01) and mixed episode populations (treatment difference=-2.56, p=0.02). Overall, adverse event profiles were similar between the populations.

LIMITATION

The lithium and valproate subgroups were combined.

CONCLUSIONS

The continuation of aripiprazole in stabilized BPD patients treated with lithium or valproate increased the time to relapse of any mood episode for manic but not mixed patients; both groups achieved greater stability in YMRS total score with adjunctive aripiprazole. Thus, adjunctive aripiprazole may be more appropriate for stabilized patients with manic episodes.