Bipolar CHOICE (Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness): a pragmatic 6-month trial of lithium versus quetiapine for bipolar disorder

Understanding the relationship between childhood abuse and affective symptoms in bipolar disorder: New insights from a network analysis

The impact of childhood abuse on the presentation of bipolar disorder could be further elucidated by comparing the networks of affective symptoms among individuals with and with no history of childhood abuse. Data from 476 participants in the Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder study were used to fit several regularised Gaussian Graphical Models. Differences in the presentation of depressive and manic symptoms were uncovered: only among participants with a history of childhood abuse, inadequacy and pessimism were central symptoms in the network of depressive symptoms, while racing thoughts was an important symptom in the network of manic symptoms. Following network theory, focusing treatments at the symptom-level and on central symptoms - like inadequacy, pessimism, and racing thoughts - could be an effective approach for managing affective symptoms among the sizeable proportion of people with bipolar disorder who have experienced childhood abuse. This study contributes a thorough investigation of the networks of affective symptoms among participants with and with no history of childhood abuse, albeit limited by the use of a binary, self-report measure of childhood abuse, thereby emphasising the importance of assessing for childhood abuse and taking needed steps towards identifying novel targets for treating bipolar disorder.

Lithium, the gold standard drug for bipolar disorder: analysis of current clinical studies

Lithium is the gold standard drug in the treatment of bipolar disorder. Despite increasing scientific interest, relatively few patients with bipolar disorder receive lithium therapy. Lithium is the only drug that is effective in the prophylaxis of manic, depressive, and suicidal symptoms. Lithium therapy is also associated with a variety of adverse drug reactions and the need for therapeutic drug monitoring. Numerous studies have focussed on the efficacy and safety of both lithium-monotherapy and lithium-add-on therapy. The aim of this study is to provide a systematic overview of clinical studies on lithium therapy for bipolar disorder from the last 7 years and to present a critical analysis of these studies. The results provide an up-to-date overview of the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of lithium therapy for bipolar disorder and thus improve the pharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder. A total of 59 studies were analysed using various analysis parameters. The studies were also categorised into different subgroups. These are lithium-monotherapy, lithium vs. placebo/drug, and lithium + adjunctive therapy. The majority of the studies (N = 20) had a duration of only 3-8 weeks. Only 13 studies lasted for > 40 weeks. Lithium was superior to aripiprazole, valproic acid, and quetiapine in terms of improving manic symptoms. Lithium therapy resulted in a lower relapse rate compared to valproic acid therapy. Lithium was more neuroprotectively effective than quetiapine. Fourteen of the 22 add-on therapies to lithium showed a predominantly positive effect on the treatment outcome compared to lithium-monotherapy. Only the add-on therapy with sertraline led to a higher rate of study discontinuations than lithium-monotherapy. Lithium is a safe and effective treatment option for children. However, risperidone and quetiapine were superior to lithium in some aspects, which is why these drugs should be considered as an alternative treatment option for children. Collectively, current clinical studies highlight the relevance of lithium in the treatment of bipolar disorder.

Preventive effect of aripiprazole once-monthly on relapse into mood episodes in bipolar disorder: A multicenter, one-year, retrospective, mirror image study

BACKGROUND

We conducted a one-year, retrospective, mirror-image study to investigate the clinical effectiveness and safety of aripiprazole once monthly (AOM) in patients with bipolar disorder (BD). We compared pre-treatment conditions with outcomes after 12 months of AOM treatment.

METHODS

Seventy-five bipolar patients were recruited from 12 hospitals in Korea. We included 75 patients with BD who had received at least three AOM treatments from September 2019 to September 2022 and had accessible electronic medical record (EMRs) for the year before and after the baseline visit.

RESULTS

The overall number of mood episodes significantly decreased from a mean of 1.5 ± 1.2 episodes pre-AOM to 0.5 ± 1.2 episodes post-AOM. Manic episodes significantly decreased from 0.8 ± 0.8 episodes pre-AOM to 0.2 ± 0.5 episodes post-AOM, and depressive episodes significantly decreased from 0.5 ± 0.8 episodes pre-AOM to 0.2 ± 0.6 episodes post-AOM (p = 0.017). Moreover, the number of psychiatric medications and pills and the proportion of patients treated with complex polypharmacy were significantly decreased post-AOM.

LIMITATIONS

The small sample size was insufficient to fully represent the entire population of individuals with BD, and potential selection bias was introduced due to only including subjects who received AOM three or more times.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that AOM can reduce mood episode relapse and may be clinically beneficial in the treatment of BD patients, potentially reducing issues associated with polypharmacy in some individuals.

Alternative metrics for characterizing longer-term clinical outcomes in difficult-to-treat depression: II. Sensitivity to treatment effects

OBJECTIVE

Characteristics of difficult-to-treat depression (DTD), including infrequent symptom remission and poor durability of benefit, compel reconsideration of the outcome metrics historically used to gauge the effectiveness of antidepressant interventions.

METHODS

Self-report and clinician assessments of depression symptom severity were obtained regularly over a 2-year period in a difficult-to-treat depression registry sample receiving treatment as usual (TAU), with or without vagus nerve stimulation (VNS). Alternative outcome metrics for characterizing symptom change were compared in effect size and discriminating power in distinguishing the vagus nerve stimulation + treatment as usual and treatment as usual treatment groups. We expected metrics based on remission status to produce weaker between-group separation than those based on the classifications of partial response or response and metrics that integrate information over time to produce greater separation than those based on single endpoint assessment.

RESULTS

Metrics based on remission status had smaller effect size and poorer discrimination in separating the treatment groups than metrics based on partial response or response classifications. Metrics that integrated information over the 2-year observation period had stronger performance characteristics than those based on symptom scores at single endpoint assessment. For both the clinician-rated and self-report depression ratings, the metrics with the strongest performance characteristics were the median percentage change in symptom scores over the observation period and the proportion of the observation period in partial response or better.

CONCLUSION

In difficult-to-treat depression, integrative symptom severity-based and time-based measures are sensitive and informative outcomes for assessing between-group treatment effects, while metrics based on remission status are not.

Association of polygenic score and the involvement of cholinergic and glutamatergic pathways with lithium treatment response in patients with bipolar disorder

Lithium is regarded as the first-line treatment for bipolar disorder (BD), a severe and disabling mental health disorder that affects about 1% of the population worldwide. Nevertheless, lithium is not consistently effective, with only 30% of patients showing a favorable response to treatment. To provide personalized treatment options for bipolar patients, it is essential to identify prediction biomarkers such as polygenic scores. In this study, we developed a polygenic score for lithium treatment response (Li+PGS) in patients with BD. To gain further insights into lithium's possible molecular mechanism of action, we performed a genome-wide gene-based analysis. Using polygenic score modeling, via methods incorporating Bayesian regression and continuous shrinkage priors, Li+PGS was developed in the International Consortium of Lithium Genetics cohort (ConLi+Gen: N = 2367) and replicated in the combined PsyCourse (N = 89) and BipoLife (N = 102) studies. The associations of Li+PGS and lithium treatment response - defined in a continuous ALDA scale and a categorical outcome (good response vs. poor response) were tested using regression models, each adjusted for the covariates: age, sex, and the first four genetic principal components. Statistical significance was determined at P < 0.05. Li+PGS was positively associated with lithium treatment response in the ConLi+Gen cohort, in both the categorical (P = 9.8 × 10-12, R2 = 1.9%) and continuous (P = 6.4 × 10-9, R2 = 2.6%) outcomes. Compared to bipolar patients in the 1st decile of the risk distribution, individuals in the 10th decile had 3.47-fold (95%CI: 2.22-5.47) higher odds of responding favorably to lithium. The results were replicated in the independent cohorts for the categorical treatment outcome (P = 3.9 × 10-4, R2 = 0.9%), but not for the continuous outcome (P = 0.13). Gene-based analyses revealed 36 candidate genes that are enriched in biological pathways controlled by glutamate and acetylcholine. Li+PGS may be useful in the development of pharmacogenomic testing strategies by enabling a classification of bipolar patients according to their response to treatment.

Real-world effectiveness of pharmacological treatments for bipolar disorder: register-based national cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pharmacological treatment patterns for bipolar disorder have changed during recent years, but for better or worse?

AIMS

To investigate the comparative real-world effectiveness of antipsychotics and mood stabilisers in bipolar disorder.

METHOD

Register-based cohort study including all Finnish residents aged 16-65 with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder from in-patient care, specialised out-patient care, sickness absence and disability pensions registers between 1996 and 2018, with a mean follow-up of 9.3 years (s.d. = 6.4). Antipsychotic and mood stabiliser use was modelled using the PRE2DUP method and risk for hospital admission for psychiatric and non-psychiatric reasons when using versus not using medications was estimated using within-individual Cox models.

RESULTS

Among 60 045 individuals (56.4% female; mean age 41.7 years, s.d. = 15.8), the five medications associated with lowest risk of psychiatric admissions were olanzapine long-acting injection (LAI) (aHR = 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.80), haloperidol LAI (aHR = 0.62, 0.47-0.81), zuclopenthixol LAI (aHR = 0.66, 95% CI 0.52-0.85), lithium (aHR = 0.74, 95% CI 0.71-0.76) and clozapine (aHR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.87). Only ziprasidone (aHR = 1.26, 95% CI 1.07-1.49) was associated with a statistically higher risk. For non-psychiatric (somatic) admissions, only lithium (aHR = 0.77, 95% CI 0.74-0.81) and carbamazepine (aHR = 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97) were associated with significantly reduced risk, whereas pregabalin, gabapentin and several oral antipsychotics, including quetiapine, were associated with an increased risk. Results for a subcohort of first-episode patients (26 395 individuals, 54.9% female; mean age 38.2 years, s.d. = 13.0) were in line with those of the total cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Lithium and certain LAI antipsychotics were associated with lowest risks of psychiatric admission. Lithium was the only treatment associated with decreased risk of both psychiatric and somatic admissions.

Updated perspectives on how and when lithium should be used in the treatment of mood disorders

INTRODUCTION

Lithium is one of the most important drugs for the treatment of mood disorders. The appropriate guidelines can ensure that more patients benefit from its use in a personalized way.

AREAS COVERED

This manuscript provides an update on the application of lithium in mood disorders, including prophylaxis of bipolar and unipolar mood disorder, treatment of acute manic and depressive episodes, augmentation of antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression, and use of lithium in pregnancy and the postpartum period.

EXPERT OPINION

Lithium remains the gold standard for the prevention of recurrences in bipolar mood disorder. For long-term treatment/management of bipolar mood disorder, clinicians should also consider lithium's anti-suicidal effect. Furthermore, after prophylactic treatment, lithium may also be augmented with antidepressants in treatment-resistant depression. There have also been some demonstration of lithium having some efficacy in acute episodes of mania and bipolar depression as well as in the prophylaxis of unipolar depression.

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.

Lithium plus antipsychotics or anticonvulsants for bipolar disorder: Comparing clinical response and metabolic changes

OBJECTIVE

Patients with bipolar disorder treated with lithium often require additional antipsychotics or anticonvulsants. However, the comparative effectiveness and safety of these agents as add-on to lithium has not been studied.

METHODS

This secondary analysis combined two similar 24-week trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder randomized to lithium (target serum level 0.4-0.6 mEq/L). Guideline-based adjunctive antipsychotics (Li+AP) and anticonvulsants (Li+AC) could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Response was measured on the Clinical Global Impression scale and we performed adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses. Analysis of variance tests compared metabolic measures including a binary diagnosis of metabolic syndrome before and after 24 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Among 379 outpatients (57% female, mean age 38 years, mean Clinical Global Impression 4.4), users of Li+AP (N = 50, primarily quetiapine and aripiprazole) improved to a similar degree (mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.6, standard deviation = 1.5) as those using lithium-only (i.e. without adjunctive antipsychotics or anticonvulsants, N = 149, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.7, standard deviation = 1.4) (p = 0.59). Users of Li+AC (N = 107, primarily lamotrigine and valproate, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.2, standard deviation = 1.3) and users of Li+AP+AC (N = 73, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.1, standard deviation = 1.3) showed worse response compared to lithium-only users (all p < 0.01). When comparing Li+AP to Li+AC, users of Li+AP improved slightly better on general (p = 0.05) and manic symptoms (p = 0.01), but showed a worse development of glucose, triglycerides, and metabolic syndrome.

CONCLUSION

Despite treatment-by-indication confounding, these findings are relevant for real-world treatment settings and emphasize the need for randomized trials on this clinically important topic.

Why lithium should be used in patients with bipolar disorder? A scoping review and an expert opinion paper

INTRODUCTION

Lithium treatment is considered the gold standard for the long-term management of bipolar disorder and recurrent unipolar depression. It is also extremely effective in other psychiatric conditions characterized by impulsivity and aggression, and for the prevention of suicidal behaviours.

AREAS COVERED

This paper provides a scoping review and an expert commentary regarding the use of lithium in adult patients. Available information about efficacy, tolerability, dosing, and switching is analyzed, and the strategies that may be most useful in real-world clinical settings are highlighted.

EXPERT OPINION

Lithium is effective on different domains of bipolar disorder, including the long-term prevention of recurrences of affective episodes, management of acute mania as well as in the prophylaxis of all affective episodes. Lithium has been defined a 'forgotten drug,' since its use in routine clinical practice has been declined over the last 20 or 30 years. Reasons for this trend include lack of adequate training on the management of lithium side effects. Considering its efficacy, use of lithium in ordinary clinical practice should be promoted. Several strategies, such as using slow-release formulations, can be easily implemented in order to minimize lithium side effects and improve its tolerability profile.

Pharmacologic Treatment and Management of Bipolar Disorder in Adolescents

INTRODUCTION

The importance of the appropriate therapeutic interventions in children and adolescents with bipolar disorder (BD) cannot be overstated since treatment choices and their consequences may have effects into adulthood.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) investigating treatment of mania, bipolar depression, and maintenance in adolescents with BD are reviewed. When RCTs are not available or are inadequate, naturalistic data or open studies are also reviewed.

EXPERT OPINION

Efficacy and safety of pharmaceutical agents in adolescents with BD appear to mirror adults with BD. Lithium/mood stabilizers are preferred first line agents over antipsychotic medications, but the latter are second line agents particularly in bipolar depression. When lithium is used, serum levels approaching 1.0 mEq/L are reasonable since younger people appear to require/tolerate higher levels. Among the antipsychotics, quetiapine appeared to be minimally better than risperidone while risperidone was associated with greater adverse events. Antipsychotics with antidepressant activity in adults, also appear to have antidepressant effects in youths. Use of antidepressants in bipolar depression is generally not recommended although it may be reasonable in specific clinical situations. The similarities between adolescent and adult outcomes suggest that it is reasonable to utilize adult data to aid with clinical decision making in adolescents with BD, especially when pediatric-specific data are unavailable.

Adjunctive dietary intervention for bipolar disorder: a randomized, controlled, parallel-group, modified double-blinded trial of a high n-3 plus low n-6 diet

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the preliminary efficacy of a high n-3 plus low n-6 (H3-L6) dietary intervention in improving mood stability in Bipolar Disorder (BD) when compared to dietary intervention with usual U.S. levels of n-6 and n-3 polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) intakes (control diet, CD).

METHODS

This 2-arm, parallel-group, randomized, modified double-blind, controlled 48-week study of 12-week intensive diet intervention in subjects with BD was conducted at a single suburban-rural site in the mid-Atlantic region. Participants with DSM-IV TR BD I or II with hypomanic or depressive symptoms were randomized, stratified on gender (N = 82). The intervention included the provision of group-specific study foods and dietary counseling. Variability of mood symptoms was measured by a twice-daily, 12-week ecological momentary analysis (EMA) paradigm, and group differences were analyzed using multilevel models. Circulating n-3 and n-6 fatty acids were measured at baseline and after 4, 8, and 12 weeks of diet exposure.

RESULTS

All 82 randomized participants were included in biochemical analyses. Seventy participants completed at least 2 EMA surveys and were included in primary EMA analyses. Variability in mood, energy, irritability, and pain as measured using EMA was reduced in the H3-L6 group compared to the CD group. No significant differences in mean ratings of mood symptoms, or any other symptom measures, were detected. The dietary intervention effect on target PUFAs significantly differed by the group over time.

CONCLUSIONS

A dietary intervention adjunctive to usual care showed preliminary efficacy in improving variability in mood symptoms in participants with BD.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov NCT02272010.

Cardiometabolic risk markers during mood-stabilizing treatment: Correlation with drug-specific effects, depressive symptoms and treatment response

BACKGROUND

Patients with bipolar disorder have higher rates of cardiometabolic comorbidities and mortality. Although guidelines emphasize the importance of cardiovascular monitoring, few studies characterized the cardiometabolic risk profile during treatment and their relation to symptomatology and treatment response.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two similar 24-weeks comparative effectiveness trials, with a combined sample of 770 participants randomized to two different lithium doses, quetiapine (300 mg/day), or standard treatment without lithium. Glucose, lipids and vital signs were measured before and after 24 weeks of treatment. We calculated several cardiovascular risk scores, assessed baseline correlations and compared the four treatment arms via multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

Higher cholesterol and LDL levels were associated with greater depression severity, showing differential correlations to specific symptoms, particularly agitation, low energy and suicidality. Those randomized to quetiapine showed a significant worsening of cardiometabolic markers during the 24-week trial. Neither baseline nor change in lipid levels correlated with differential treatment response.

LIMITATIONS

Study duration was short from the perspective of cardiometabolic risk markers, and all treatment arms included patients taking adjunct antipsychotics. The trials compared quetiapine to lithium, but not to other medications known to affect similar risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with 300 mg/day quetiapine for 24 weeks, representing a short and common dose course, resulted in increased cardiometabolic risk markers, emphasizing the importance of monitoring during mood-stabilizing treatment. The symptom-specific associations are in line with previous studies in unipolar depression, suggesting a cardiometabolic-depression link that needs to be further studied in bipolar depression.

Consensus on nomenclature for clinical staging models in bipolar disorder: A narrative review from the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Staging Task Force

OBJECTIVES

Clinical staging is widely used in medicine to map disease progression, inform prognosis, and guide treatment decisions; in psychiatry, however, staging remains a hypothetical construct. To facilitate future research in bipolar disorders (BD), a well-defined nomenclature is needed, especially since diagnosis is often imprecise with blurred boundaries, and a full understanding of pathophysiology is lacking.

METHODS

Under the auspices of the International Society of Bipolar Disorders, a Task Force of international experts was convened to review, discuss, and integrate findings from the scientific literature relevant to the development of a consensus staging model and standardize a terminology that could be used to advance future research including staging of BD and related disorders.

RESULTS

Consensus opinion and areas of uncertainty or difference were identified in regard to terms referring to staging as it may apply to BD, to at-risk status and subthreshold stages, and to various clinical stages of BD as it is currently diagnosed.

CONCLUSION

The use of a standardized nomenclature about the clinical stages of BD will facilitate communication about research on clinical and pathological components of this heterogeneous group of disorders. The concepts presented are based on current evidence, but the template provided allows for further refinements as etiological advances come to light.

Response and remission rates during 24 weeks of mood-stabilizing treatment for bipolar depression depending on early non-response

BACKGROUND

We aimed to study the probability of bipolar depression response at 24 weeks given initial non-response.

METHODS

We combined two multi-site, 24-week trials including similar populations following the same evidence-based guidelines randomizing patients to lithium or quetiapine. Additional mood-stabilizing treatment was possible if clinically indicated. We report cumulative proportions of response (>50% improvement in MADRS) and remission (MADRS<10).

RESULTS

We included 592 participants with bipolar depression (mean 39 years, 59% female, mean MADRS 25). Among 393 (66%) participants without response after 2 weeks, 46% responded by 24 weeks; for 291 (49%) without response at 4 weeks, 40% responded and 33% remitted by 24 weeks; for 222 (38%) without a response at 6 weeks, 36% responded and 29% remitted by 24 weeks; for 185 (31%) without a response at 8 weeks, 29% responded and 24% remitted by 24 weeks. Rates were similar for participants who had started an additional mood-stabilizing drug during the first 6 or 8 weeks.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with bipolar depression and non-response after 6 weeks treatment, representing an adequate bipolar depression trial, only one-third responded by 24 weeks. These results highlight the need for better treatment alternatives for non-responders to evidence-based treatments for bipolar depression.

Ultra-long-term lithium therapy: all-important matters and a case of successful 50-year lithium treatment

This paper discusses essential issues related to long-term lithium therapy and presents a case of successful 50-year lithium treatment. Lithium is currently regarded as the drug of choice for preventing manic and depressive recurrences in bipolar disorder. In 1/3 of patients with bipolar disorder, long-term monotherapy with lithium can completely prevent recurrences of abnormal mood. Numerous clinical and psychosocial factors associated with a good response to lithium have been described. Lithium is more efficacious than other mood stabilizers, and its long-term treatment significantly exceeds them. Lithium also exerts antisuicidal, immunomodulatory, and neuroprotective effects. The main problems associated with long-term lithium treatment include kidney, thyroid, and probably cognitive issues. In this paper, a case of successful continuous lithium treatment for 50 years in a 79-year-old female patient is presented. In this patient, apart from maintaining a euthymic state, long-term lithium treatment also exerted a favorable effect on general health, especially the elimination of viral and other respiratory infections. It is concluded that ultra-long term lithium therapy can enable good professional and psychosocial functioning for many patients, and the possible somatic side effects are manageable.

Illness stage and predominant polarity in bipolar disorder: Correlation with burden of illness and moderation of treatment outcome

Bipolar disorder often follows a set progression best described in stages where advanced stages are associated with poorer outcomes. Bipolar disorder is also often characterized by a predominance of episode polarity, where some individuals experience more depressive episodes (termed predominant depressive polarity) while others experience more hypo/manic episodes (termed predominant hypo/manic polarity). We examined the associations between staging and predominant polarity with measures of illness burden and treatment outcome utilizing data from a six-month comparative effectiveness trial of lithium and quetiapine in bipolar disorder (Bipolar CHOICE). We used number of self-reported lifetime mood (depressive and hypo/manic) episodes as a proxy for staging and ratio of depressive to manic episodes to define predominant polarity. Polarity and staging were correlated with several measures of burden of illness. Childhood abuse was correlated with more lifetime mood episodes, while more depressive episodes and depressive polarity were correlated with more anxiety disorder comorbidity. Depressive polarity was also correlated with more past trials of psychotropics, particularly antidepressants. However, neither staging nor predominant polarity moderated the randomized treatment effect of lithium vs. quetiapine. Number of depressive episodes in the past year was identified as a potential predictor of overall worse treatment outcome, regardless of medication condition. In conclusion, though staging and predominant episode polarity correlated with several measures of illness burden, they were not associated with differential treatment outcomes. This could be because many of our patients presented for treatment at advanced stages of illness and further highlights the need for early intervention in bipolar disorder.

Advances in the psychopharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder type I

INTRODUCTION

Research into the pharmacologic management of bipolar type I illness continues to progress.

AREAS COVERED

Randomized clinical trials performed with type I bipolar disorder in the years 2015 to August 2020 are reviewed. There are new indications for the use of cariprazine, for bipolar mania and depression, and a long-acting injectable formulation of aripiprazole has also been approved for relapse prevention in bipolar illness. Most of the randomized clinical trials are effectiveness studies.

EXPERT OPINION

Over the 20 years from 1997 through 2016, the use of lithium and other mood stabilizers has declined by 50%, while the use of both second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) and antidepressants has increased considerably. Over the same time period (1990-2017), disability-adjusted life years (DALYs) increased by 54.4%, from 6.02 million in 1990 to 9.29 million in 2017 which is greater than the 47.74% increase in incidence of the disease, suggesting that the changes in prescribing patterns have not been helpful for our patients. Furthermore, recent effectiveness studies continue to confirm the superiority of lithium and other mood stabilizers in the management of bipolar illness for both psychiatric and medical outcomes, reaffirming their role as foundational treatments in the management of type I bipolar disorder. Clinicians need to reassess their prescribing habits.

Psychotic symptoms during bipolar depressive episodes and suicidal ideation

BACKGROUND

Psychotic symptoms during bipolar depressive episodes, especially in outpatients, are under recognized and studied by clinicians and researchers. We examined the relationship between psychotic symptoms during a depressive episode and suicidal ideation in bipolar patients.

METHODS

Participants (N = 351) were adult, depressed outpatients with bipolar disorder (BD) in a comparative effectiveness study of quetiapine versus lithium. Psychotic symptoms were assessed via Bipolar Inventory of Signs and Symptoms Scale (BISS) and depressive episodes via Mini-International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). Because only 4.84% (N = 17) endorsed psychotic symptoms, we performed iterative multivariate matching with non-psychotic participants. On every matched population, a multiple regression analysis examined whether psychotic symptoms were associated with suicidal ideation, via the Concise Health Risk Taking scale (CHRT-12).

RESULTS

Averaged across the 50 matched populations, current psychotic symptoms predicted active suicidal ideation on the CHRT, but not a passive propensity toward suicide or total CHRT scores, after adjusting for common correlates of suicidality (e.g., previous suicidal behavior) (β=0.59, p=.01, R2= 0.41).

LIMITATIONS

Our study was limited by three factors. First, the generalizability of our study was limited as the sample included only outpatients. Next, the analysis was cross-sectional and does not allow for causal interpretation. Lastly, our study lacked information regarding the content and mood congruency of participants' psychosis.

CONCLUSION

While a small proportion of BD outpatients had current symptoms of psychosis during their depressive episode, those who did were more likely to endorse active suicidal thoughts, including suicide methods and plans.

Adjunctive antidepressant treatment among 763 outpatients with bipolar disorder: Findings from the Bipolar CHOICE and LiTMUS trials

BACKGROUND

Adjunctive antidepressants are frequently used for bipolar depression but their clinical efficacy has been studied in few trials and little is known about how co-occurring manic symptoms affect treatment response.

METHODS

Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (N = 482) and Lithium Treatment Moderate-Dose Use Study (N = 281) were similar comparative effectiveness trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder comparing four different randomized treatment arms with adjunctive personalized guideline-based treatment for 24 weeks. Adjunctive antidepressant treatment could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses compared users of antidepressants to nonusers overall and in different subcohorts.

RESULTS

Of the 763 patients, 282 (37.0%) used antidepressant drugs during the study. Antidepressant users had less improvement compared to nonusers on the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder and on measures of depression. This was particularly true among patients with co-occurring manic symptoms. Exclusion of individuals begun on antidepressants late in the study (potentially due to overall worse response) resulted in no differences between users and nonusers. We found no differences in treatment effects on mania scales.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large cohort of outpatients with bipolar disorder, clinically indicated and guideline-based adjunctive antidepressant treatment was not associated with lower depressive symptoms or higher mania symptoms. The treatment-by-indication confounding due to the nonrandomized design of the trials complicates causal interpretations, but no analyses indicated better treatment effects of adjunctive antidepressants.

20-Year Trends in the Pharmacologic Treatment of Bipolar Disorder by Psychiatrists in Outpatient Care Settings

OBJECTIVE

Pharmacological options for treating bipolar disorder have increased over the past 20 years, with several second-generation antipsychotics receiving regulatory approval in the 1990s. The authors describe trends in use of pharmacological agents in the outpatient management of bipolar disorder.

METHODS

Using nationally representative data from the 1997-2016 National Ambulatory Medical Care Surveys, the authors examined trends in the use of mood stabilizers, first- and second-generation antipsychotics, and antidepressants among psychiatrist visits for which bipolar disorder was listed among the primary diagnoses. A logistic regression model was used to identify statistically significant trends, with covariates including age, gender, race/ethnicity, and primary insurance.

RESULTS

Antipsychotics were increasingly more commonly prescribed, increasing from 12.4% of outpatient visits for bipolar disorder in the 1997-2000 period to 51.4% in the 2013-2016 period (adjusted odds ratio=5.05, 95% CI=3.65-7.01). Use of mood stabilizers decreased from 62.3% of visits for bipolar disorder in the 1997-2000 period to 26.4% in the 2013-2016 period (adjusted odds ratio=0.18, 95% CI=0.13-0.27). Prescription of antidepressants occurred in 47.0% of visits for bipolar disorder in the 1997-2000 period and 57.5% in the 2013-2016 period. Prescription of an antidepressant without a mood stabilizer increased substantially, from 17.9% in the 1997-2000 period to 40.9% in the 2013-2016 period (adjusted odds ratio=2.88, 95% CI=2.06-4.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Substantial changes have occurred in the treatment of bipolar disorder over the past 20 years, with second-generation antipsychotics in large measure supplanting traditional mood stabilizers. Antidepressant prescriptions persisted despite a lack of evidence for their efficacy in bipolar disorder and concerns about increasing the risk of mania. Research is needed to compare the real-world effectiveness and tolerability of newer antipsychotics with those of traditional mood stabilizers.

The impact of binge eating behavior on lithium- and quetiapine-associated changes in body weight, body mass index, and waist circumference during 6 months of treatment: Findings from the bipolar CHOICE study

BACKGROUND

Lithium and quetiapine can cause weight gain, but their comparative longer term anthropometric effects are unknown, as are the potential moderating effects of baseline binge-eating (BE) behavior.

METHODS

We assessed 6 month changes in body weight, body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference in 482 adults with DSM-IV bipolar disorders who participated in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium and quetiapine with evidence-based adjunctive treatment (Bipolar CHOICE). Anthropometric measurements were obtained at baseline, and at 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks. BE behavior was defined as affirmative responses to MINI items M1 and M3 at baseline. Data were analyzed using a mixed model repeated measures approach, adjusted for baseline values of dependent measures.

RESULTS

On average, body weight and BMI increased over 6 months with lithium and quetiapine. However, those treated with quetiapine experienced greater increases from baseline in body weight (peak change, + 3.6 lbs. vs. + 1.4 lbs.) and BMI (peak change, + 0.6 kg/m² vs. + 0.3 kg/m²), starting at 2 weeks (group x time, F_8,3052= 2.9, p = 0.003 for body weight, F_8,3052= 3.0, p = 0.002 for BMI). Significant increases in waist circumference were observed only with quetiapine. The relationship between drug treatment and changes in body weight (group x time x binge eating status, F_1,2770= 2.0, p = 0.002), BMI (F_1,2767= 2.0, p = 0.002), and waist circumference (women only, F_25,1621= 2.9, p < 0.0001) were moderated by BE behavior. The largest increases over 24 weeks in body weight and BMI, and waist circumference in women, occurred for quetiapine-treated patients with baseline binge-eating, relative to quetiapine-treated patients without binge eating and lithium-treated patients with or without baseline binge-eating.

LIMITATIONS

Bipolar CHOICE was not designed to study anthropometric outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Greater changes in body weight, BMI, and waist circumference occurred with quetiapine- versus lithium-based treatment over 6 months of treatment. The effects of study drugs on these anthropometric measures were moderated by BE behavior at baseline.

An evaluation of suicidal risk in bipolar patients with comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder

BACKGROUND

While bipolar disorder (BD) and posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) frequently co-occur and individually have a higher risk of suicide compared to the general population, few studies have examined the impact of comorbid PTSD on suicidal ideation in patients with BD.

METHODS

We analyzed baseline data from the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for bipolar disorder study (Bipolar CHOICE), a 6-month, pharmacological comparative effectiveness trial of individuals with BD. Bipolar CHOICE enrolled 482 individuals. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis assessed whether comorbid PTSD was associated with increased suicidal ideation as assessed by the Concise Health Risk Tracking Scale (CHRT) total and factor scores, while controlling for common correlates of suicidal ideation in this population such as a current major depressive episode, comorbid anxiety disorders, severity of illness and previous suicide attempts.

RESULTS

Consistent with our hypothesis, diagnosis of comorbid PTSD was a significant predictor of the CHRT total score (β=2.59, p=.03). Comorbid PTSD was also a significant predictor of the CHRT propensity factor (β=2.32, adjusted p=.04), but was not a significant predictor of the active suicidal thoughts factor. Additionally, all participants with comorbid PTSD (N = 58) endorsed current suicidal ideation (p=.005) and were more likely to have had a previous suicide attempt (p<.001) compared to those without PTSD.

LIMITATIONS

Generalizability beyond outpatient settings is limited, mixed affective states were not assessed, and analyses were cross-sectional.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients have an increased risk of suicidal ideation when PTSD is comorbid with BD.

Prediction of lithium response using clinical data

OBJECTIVE

Promptly establishing maintenance therapy could reduce morbidity and mortality in patients with bipolar disorder. Using a machine learning approach, we sought to evaluate whether lithium responsiveness (LR) is predictable using clinical markers.

METHOD

Our data are the largest existing sample of direct interview-based clinical data from lithium-treated patients (n = 1266, 34.7% responders), collected across seven sites, internationally. We trained a random forest model to classify LR-as defined by the previously validated Alda scale-against 180 clinical predictors.

RESULTS

Under appropriate cross-validation procedures, LR was predictable in the pooled sample with an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.80 (95% CI 0.78-0.82) and a Cohen kappa of 0.46 (0.4-0.51). The model demonstrated a particularly low false-positive rate (specificity 0.91 [0.88-0.92]). Features related to clinical course and the absence of rapid cycling appeared consistently informative.

CONCLUSION

Clinical data can inform out-of-sample LR prediction to a potentially clinically relevant degree. Despite the relevance of clinical course and the absence of rapid cycling, there was substantial between-site heterogeneity with respect to feature importance. Future work must focus on improving classification of true positives, better characterizing between- and within-site heterogeneity, and further testing such models on new external datasets.

Bipolar depression and suicidal ideation: Moderators and mediators of a complex relationship

INTRODUCTION

Not all patients with bipolar depression have suicidal ideation (SI). This study examines some factors that link bipolar depression to SI.

METHODS

482 individuals with bipolar I or II were randomized to either lithium or quetiapine plus adjunctive personalized therapy in a 24 week comparative effectiveness trial. Severity of depression and SI were assessed with the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS). We examined potential moderators (age, gender, age of illness onset, bipolar type, comorbid anxiety, substance use, past suicide attempts, childhood abuse and treatment arm) and mediators (severity of anxiety, mania, irritability, impairment in functioning (LIFE-RIFT) and satisfaction and enjoyment of life (Q-LES-Q)) of the effect of depression on SI. Statistical analyses were conducted using generalized estimating equations with repeated measures.

RESULTS

Bipolar type and past suicide attempts moderated the effect of depression on SI. Life satisfaction mediated the effect of depression and SI. The relationship between anxiety, depression and SI was complex due to the high level of correlation. Treatment with lithium or quetiapine did not moderate the effect of depression on SI.

LIMITATIONS

Suicide assessment was only done using an item on BISS. Patient population was not specifically chosen for high suicide risk.

DISCUSSION

Individuals with Bipolar II experienced more SI with lower levels of depression severity. A history of suicide predisposed patients to higher levels of SI given the same severity of depression. Reduced life satisfaction mediates the effect of depression on SI and may be a target for therapeutic interventions.

Complex polypharmacy in bipolar disorder: Side effect burden, adherence, and response predictors

BACKGROUND

Complex polypharmacy (CP) is common in bipolar disorder (BD). We assessed the associations between CP, adherence, and side effect burden, and patient traits associated with clinical improvement in relationship to CP.

METHODS

We conducted a secondary analysis of 482 adult BD participants in the Bipolar CHOICE trial. We examined the associations between CP (use of ≥3 BD medications) and non-adherence (missing >30% of BD medication doses in the last 30 days) and side effect burden (Frequency, Intensity and Burden of Side Effects Rating scale) using multivariate models with patient random effects. We used logistic regression to assess the patient traits associated with remission among those with majority CP use (Clinical Global Impression-Severity for BD score ≤2 for 8+ weeks).

RESULTS

43% of patients had any CP and 25% had CP for the majority of the study. CP was associated with non-adherence (OR = 2.51, 95% CI [1.81, 3.50]), but not worse side effect burden. Among those with CP, 16% achieved remission; those with non-adherence, comorbid social or generalized anxiety disorder, or BD I vs. II were less likely to achieve remission among those with CP.

LIMITATIONS

There could be unmeasured confounding between use of CP and side effect burden or adherence. Adherence was measured by self-report, which could be subject to reporting error.

CONCLUSIONS

BD patients with CP were less likely to adhere to therapy, and those with worse adherence to CP were less likely to clinically respond. Clinicians should assess medication adherence prior to adding another agent to medication regimens.

Early intervention for bipolar disorder - Do current treatment guidelines provide recommendations for the early stages of the disorder?

BACKGROUND

Interventions early in the course of bipolar disorder (BD) may have the potential to limit its functional and symptomatic impact. However, the implementation of specific early interventions for BD has been limited which may at least partly be due to the lack of guidelines focused on the early illness stages. We therefore aimed to review the current recommendations for early stage BD from clinical practice guidelines.

METHODS

We searched PubMED and PsychINFO for clinical guidelines for BD published in the ten years prior to 1 November 2018. Recommendations from identified guidelines that addressed early stage BD or first episode mania were consolidated and compared. We also reviewed the guidelines relating to adolescents with BD to complement the guidelines related to those in the early illness course.

RESULTS

We identified fourteen international and national guidelines on BD or affective psychoses. Most guidelines contained a separate section on adolescents, but only a few referred specifically to early stage BD. There were no consistent recommendations for early stage disorder, except with respect to the indications for maintenance medication treatments. For adolescents, there was a consistent recommendation for the use of second generation antipsychotics for treating acute mania.

LIMITATION

The main limitation is that the identified guidelines did not include primary data that clearly separated illness and developmental stages.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a lack of emphasis on early BD among widely-respected current clinical guidelines, likely reflecting the dearth of primary data. Future evidence or consensus-based recommendations could significantly inform clinical practice for this population.

Predictive modeling for response to lithium and quetiapine in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Lithium and quetiapine are known to be effective treatments for bipolar disorder. However, little information is available to inform prediction of response to these medications. Machine-learning methods can identify predictors of response by examining variables simultaneously. Further evaluation of models on a test sample can estimate how well these models would generalize to other samples.

METHODS

Data (N = 482) were drawn from a randomized clinical trial of outpatients with bipolar I or II disorder who received adjunctive personalized treatment plus either lithium or quetiapine. Elastic net regularization (ENR) was used to generate models for lithium and quetiapine; these models were evaluated on a test set.

RESULTS

Predictions from the lithium model explained 17.4% of the variance in actual observed scores of patients who received lithium in the test set, while predictions from the quetiapine model explained 32.1% of the variance of patients that received quetiapine. Of the baseline variables selected, those with the largest parameter estimates were: severity of mania; attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) comorbidity; nonsuicidal self-injurious behavior; employment; and comorbidity with each of two anxiety disorders (social phobia/society anxiety and agoraphobia). Predictive accuracy of the ENR model outperformed the simple and basic theoretical models.

CONCLUSION

ENR is an effective approach for building optimal and generalizable models. Variables identified through this methodology can inform future research on predictors of response to lithium and quetiapine, as well as future modeling efforts of treatment choice in bipolar disorder.

Monotherapy vs. combination therapy for post mania maintenance treatment: A population based cohort study

In recent years, the use of atypical antipsychotics and combination therapy for relapse prevention in bipolar disorder has increased substantially. However, real-world data on the comparative effectiveness of these treatment options are largely non-existent. We conducted a population-based cohort study, using data from Swedish national registers. All patients aged 18-75 years who were hospitalized for mania 2006-2014 and filled at least one prescription of lithium, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole or any combination of these drugs were included, and followed for up to one year after hospital discharge, generating follow-up data from 5 713 hospitalizations. We used Cox proportional hazard regression models to study time to treatment failure for each individual drug and combination therapy, using lithium as comparator. Treatment failure was defined as treatment discontinuation, switch, or rehospitalization, and the results were adjusted for clinical and sociodemographic factors. We found that treatment failure occurred in 85% of cases and that the majority of combination therapies were associated with lower risks of treatment failure compared to monotherapies. Patients combining lithium + valproate + quetiapine had the lowest risk of treatment failure (adjusted HR [AHR] 0.40, 95% CI 0.30-0.54), followed by patients on lithium + valproate + olanzapine (AHR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45-0.68). In contrast, monotherapies with antipsychotics were associated with significantly higher risks of treatment failure compared to single use of lithium. In conclusion, our results support experimental findings, suggesting that combination therapy is more effective than monotherapy after a manic episode.

Comorbid anxiety in bipolar CHOICE: Insights from the bipolar inventory of symptoms scale

BACKGROUND

Approximately 86-89% of patients with BD have a comorbid anxiety disorder associated with poor quality of life and reduced likelihood of recovery from an acute mood episode. The purpose of this study is to assess the prevalence and impact of comorbid anxiety using the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS) in patients with BD who participated in a 6-month pragmatic trial.

METHODS

Participants (N = 482) in the Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE) study were adults with BD I or II. Anxiety diagnoses were assessed with the MINI. Global illness severity was assessed using the Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Version. Mood symptoms and anxiety severity were assessed using the BISS.

RESULTS

61% of the study sample met criteria for a current anxiety disorder. Patients with a higher BISS anxiety score at baseline had a higher overall BD illness severity, depressive severity, and manic episode severity (p < 0.001). A single cutoff value of BISS anxiety had great sensitivity, yet poor specificity for determining a comorbid anxiety diagnosis. There were no significant differences in outcomes for individuals treated for anxiety disorders with anxiolytics compared with those who were not treated with anxiolytics.

LIMITATIONS

Sample size limitations prevented an analysis of whether the BISS cutoff score of 10 performed differently across varied anxiety disorders.

CONCLUSIONS

Given its ability to identify patients with co-occurring anxiety, the BISS anxiety subscale shows clinical utility as a screening measure though its application as a clinical assessment measure may not be advisable.

Can lithium salts prevent depressive episodes in the real world?

To critically examine the effectiveness of lithium in preventing depressive symptoms (mixed and depressive episodes) in real life settings, taking into account adherence to drug treatment and its implications for the clinical costs of the disease. Overall, 72 patients with bipolar disorder initially treated with lithium carbonate were included and followed-up for 10 years. Patients were assessed every 8 weeks for morbidity and alcohol/drug consumption. Patients with good adherence to lithium had fewer episodes with depressive features than poor adherers (B = 2.405, p = 0.046) and also fewer manic and hypomanic episodes (B = 2.572; p < 0.001), after controlling for confounders. Time to relapse into a depressive or mixed episode and into a manic or hypomanic episode was shorter in patients with poor adherence. The costs of the 1.95 ± 2.38 (mean ± standard deviation) admissions of adherent patients through the 10 years of follow-up were €10,349, while the costs of the 6.25 ± 4.92 admissions of non-adherent patients were €44,547. In clinical practice settings, long-term lithium salts seem to have a preventive effect on depressive symptoms.

Challenging the Negative Perception of Lithium and Optimizing Its Long-Term Administration

The use of lithium for the prevention of recurrences in mood disorders has a 55-year history. Nowadays, lithium is universally accepted as the first-choice mood-stabilizer (MS) for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. In addition to its mood-stabilizing properties, lithium exerts anti-suicidal, immunomodulatory and neuroprotective action which may further substantiate its clinical usefulness. Despite these facts, the use of lithium in mood disorders has been greatly underutilized. The reasons include the introduction and promoting other MS as well as a perception of lithium as a “toxic drug” due to its side effects, mainly thyroid, renal and cognitive disturbances. The trends in lithium prescription in recent decades show relative stability or a decline at the expense of other mood-stabilizing drugs, both first generation (valproate) and second generation (olanzapine, quetiapine, lamotrigine). In this review article, the negative perception of lithium by some clinicians will be challenged. First, the data showing lithium superiority over other MS will be presented. Second, the lithium-induced side effects which can make a challenge for a more frequent application of this drug will be delineated, and their proper management described. Finally, an issue of benefits of long-term administration of lithium will be discussed, including the phenomenon of the “excellent lithium responders” (ER) as well as a subject of starting lithium prophylaxis early in the course of the illness. This review article is based on the 47-year experience with lithium therapy by the author of the article.

A Pilot Study of the Effectiveness of Lithium Versus Quetiapine Immediate Release Monotherapy in Patients With Bipolar Spectrum Disorders

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of lithium versus quetiapine immediate release (IR) monotherapy in patients with bipolar I, II, or subthreshold bipolar disorder at any phase.

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomized to lithium or quetiapine IR for 16 weeks. The difference in the time to discontinuation from study due to "all causes" between lithium and quetiapine IR groups and changes from baseline to 8 and 16 weeks in depression, mania, anxiety, quality of life (QOL), metabolic profiles, and proinflammatory markers were compared.

RESULTS

Of the 42 patients randomized to lithium (n = 18) and quetiapine IR (n = 24), the median time to discontinuation due to "all causes" was 6 weeks (95% confidence interval, 2-12 weeks) in the lithium group and 8 weeks (95% confidence interval, 6 weeks to not calculable) in the quetiapine IR group. The mean time to discontinuation due to "all causes" was 7.7 ± 1.1 weeks for lithium versus 8.4 ± 0.8 weeks for quetiapine IR (P = 0.54). There was no significant difference between lithium and quetiapine IR in changes in the severity of depression, mania/hypomania, anxiety, and QOL as a whole or only in patients with depressive index episode. The decrease in total cholesterol was significantly larger with lithium than with quetiapine IR (P = 0.05) as a whole, but not only in patients with depression index episode. There was no other significant difference in changes in metabolic panels and inflammatory markers between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The difference in effectiveness between lithium and quetiapine IR monotherapy in a real-world bipolar population was minimal. Large-sample studies are needed to support or refute this finding.

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.

Prevalence and predictors of physician recommendations for medication adjustment in bipolar disorder treatment

BACKGROUND

Successful medication management for bipolar disorder requires clinicians to monitor and adjust regimens as needed, to achieve maximum effectiveness and patient adherence. This study aims to measure the prevalence of indications for medication adjustment at visits for bipolar disorder treatment; the frequency with which physicians recommend medication adjustments; and how strongly the indications predict the adjustments.

METHODS

Data included 3,094 visits for 457 patients in Bipolar CHOICE, a comparative effectiveness study that compared treatment with lithium versus quetiapine. A set of indications for adjustment was matched to reports of whether the physician recommended a medication adjustment at that visit, and what type. Associations between indication and adjustment were examined using bivariate tests and hierarchical logistic mixed effects models.

RESULTS

Medication adjustment was recommended at 63% of the visits where one of the indications was present, and at 53% of all visits. In multivariable analyses, adjustment was more likely to be recommended if there was an indication of non-response or side effects, for patients who started on quetiapine rather than lithium, or for patients who were female, married, employed or more educated.

LIMITATIONS

The study's cross-sectional design implies that observed associations could result from confounding variables. Also, the CHOICE trial placed certain restrictions on physicians' medication choices, although this is not likely to have resulted in major alterations of prescribing patterns.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical inertia may help explain the lack of any adjustment recommendation at 37% of the visits where one of the indications was present. Other explanations could also apply, such as watchful waiting.

Treatment outcomes of acute bipolar depressive episode with psychosis

BACKGROUND

The impact of psychosis on the treatment of bipolar depression is remarkably understudied. The primary aim of this study was to compare treatment outcomes of bipolar depressed individuals with and without psychosis. The secondary aim was to compare the effect of lithium and quetiapine, each with adjunctive personalized treatments (APTs), in the psychotic subgroup.

METHODS

We assessed participants with DSM-IV bipolar depression included in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium and quetiapine with APTs (the Bipolar CHOICE study). Severity was assessed by the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS) and by the Clinical Global Impression Scale-Severity-Bipolar Version (CGI-S-BP). Mixed models were used to assess the course of symptom change, and Cox regression survival analysis was used to assess the time to remission.

RESULTS

Psychotic features were present in 10.6% (n = 32) of the depressed participants (n = 303). Those with psychotic features had higher scores on the BISS before (75.2 ± 17.6 vs. 54.9 ± 16.3; P < .001) and after (37.2 ± 19.7 vs. 26.3 ± 18.0; P = .003) 6-month treatment. The CGI-S-BP yielded similar results. Participants with and without psychosis had similar course of symptom improvement and similar time to remission. There was no significant difference in the treatment outcomes of lithium (n = 11) and quetiapine (n = 21) among the psychotic subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Bipolar depressive episodes with psychotic features are more severe, and compared to nonpsychotic depressions, present a similar course of improvement. Given the small number of participants presenting psychosis, the lack of statistically significant difference between lithium- and quetiapine-based treatment of psychotic bipolar depressive episodes needs replication in a larger sample.

Bipolar disorders

Bipolar disorders are chronic and recurrent disorders that affect >1% of the global population. Bipolar disorders are leading causes of disability in young people as they can lead to cognitive and functional impairment and increased mortality, particularly from suicide and cardiovascular disease. Psychiatric and nonpsychiatric medical comorbidities are common in patients and might also contribute to increased mortality. Bipolar disorders are some of the most heritable psychiatric disorders, although a model with gene-environment interactions is believed to best explain the aetiology. Early and accurate diagnosis is difficult in clinical practice as the onset of bipolar disorder is commonly characterized by nonspecific symptoms, mood lability or a depressive episode, which can be similar in presentation to unipolar depression. Moreover, patients and their families do not always understand the significance of their symptoms, especially with hypomanic or manic symptoms. As specific biomarkers for bipolar disorders are not yet available, careful clinical assessment remains the cornerstone of diagnosis. The detection of hypomanic symptoms and longtudinal clinical assessment are crucial to differentiate a bipolar disorder from other conditions. Optimal early treatment of patients with evidence-based medication (typically mood stabilizers and antipsychotics) and psychosocial strategies is necessary.

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.

Sleep disturbance may impact treatment outcome in bipolar disorder: A preliminary investigation in the context of a large comparative effectiveness trial

BACKGROUND

Bipolar patients experience sleep disturbances during and between mood episodes. Yet the impact of sleep on treatment with different medications has not been fully explored. The purpose of this paper is to explore the potential impact of poor sleep at baseline on outcomes in a randomized effectiveness trial of quetiapine and lithium.

METHODS

The Bipolar CHOICE study was a 6-month, parallel group, multisite randomized controlled trial. Participants with bipolar disorder (N = 482; 59% female and age 18-70 years) received quetiapine or lithium. Patients were allowed to also receive adjunctive personalized treatments, which were guideline-informed, empirically-based medications added to treatment as needed. Medication changes were recorded as necessary clinical adjustments (NCA). Fisher's exact tests, mixed-regression models, and Mann-Whitney U tests were used to assess demographic and clinical characteristics as well as whether sleep disturbance would predict outcomes.

RESULTS

63% of patients had baseline sleep disturbance. Individuals with sleep disturbance had worse bipolar illness severity, greater severity of depression, mania, anxiety, irritability, and psychosis, were less likely to have sustained response (17% vs. 29%; adjusted RR: 0.55, 95% CI: 0.38-0.78, p = 0.0006) and had more NCAs (median 0.71 vs. 0.59, p = 0.03).

LIMITATIONS

Our findings were limited by how we defined sleep disturbance, and by how severity of sleep disturbance was assessed with one item with a non-sleep specific measure.

CONCLUSIONS

Baseline sleep disturbance was associated with more severe bipolar symptoms and worse 6-month outcomes. Further research is warranted on improving sleep in bipolar disorder, especially the role of psychosocial interventions.

Staging in bipolar disorder: from theoretical framework to clinical utility

Illness staging is widely utilized in several medical disciplines to help predict course or prognosis, and optimize treatment. Staging models in psychiatry in general, and bipolar disorder in particular, depend on the premise that psychopathology moves along a predictable path: an at-risk or latency stage, a prodrome progressing to a first clinical threshold episode, and one or more recurrences with the potential to revert or progress to late or end-stage manifestations. The utility and validity of a staging model for bipolar disorder depend on its linking to clinical outcome, treatment response and neurobiological measures. These include progressive biochemical, neuroimaging and cognitive changes, and potentially stage-specific differences in response to pharmacological and psychosocial treatments. Mechanistically, staging models imply the presence of an active disease process that, if not remediated, can lead to neuroprogression, a more malignant disease course and functional deterioration. Biological elements thought to be operative in bipolar disorder include a genetic diathesis, physical and psychic trauma, epigenetic changes, altered neurogenesis and apoptosis, mitochondrial dysfunction, inflammation, and oxidative stress. Many available agents, such as lithium, have effects on these targets. Staging models also suggest the utility of stage-specific treatment approaches that may not only target symptom reduction, but also impede illness neuroprogression. These treatment approaches range from prevention for at-risk individuals, to early intervention strategies for prodromal and newly diagnosed individuals, complex combination therapy for rapidly recurrent illness, and palliative-type approaches for those at chronic, late stages of illness. There is hope that prompt initiation of potentially disease modifying therapies may preclude or attenuate the cognitive and structural changes seen in the later stages of bipolar disorder. The aims of this paper are to: a) explore the current level of evidence supporting the descriptive staging of the syndromal pattern of bipolar disorder; b) describe preliminary attempts at validation; c) make recommendations for the direction of further studies; and d) provide a distillation of the potential clinical implications of staging in bipolar disorder within a broader transdiagnostic framework.

Clinical correlates of acute bipolar depressive episode with psychosis

BACKGROUND

Psychotic bipolar depressive episodes remain remarkably understudied despite being common and having a significant impact on bipolar disorder. The aim of this study is to identify the characteristics of depressed bipolar patients with current psychosis compared to those without psychosis.

METHODS

We used baseline data of a comparative effectiveness study of lithium and quetiapine for bipolar disorder (the Bipolar CHOICE study) to compare demographic, clinical, and functioning variables between those with and without psychotic symptoms. Of the 482 participants, 303 (62.9%) were eligible for the present study by meeting DSM-IV criteria for an acute bipolar depressive episode. Univariate analyses were conducted first, and then included in a model controlling for symptom severity.

RESULTS

The sample was composed mostly of women (60.7%) and the mean age was 39.5±12.1 years. Psychosis was present in 10.6% (n=32) of the depressed patients. Psychotic patients had less education, lower income, and were more frequently single and unemployed. Psychosis was also associated with a more severe depressive episode, higher suicidality, more comorbid conditions and worse functioning. Most group differences disappeared when controlling for depression severity.

LIMITATIONS

Only outpatients were included and the presence of psychosis in previous episodes was not assessed.

CONCLUSION

Psychosis during bipolar depressive episodes is present even in an outpatient sample. Psychotic, depressed patients have worse illness outcomes, but future research is necessary to confirm if these outcomes are only associated with the severity of the disorder or if some of them are independent of it.

A retrospective record review and assessment of cost of quetiapine use in a community psychiatric setting in the Sedibeng district of Gauteng

BACKGROUND

With the revision of the National Essential Medicines List in South Africa, quetiapine is only available at the discretion of individual institutions in the public health sector. However, quetiapine is effective in managing all aspects of bipolar disorder, including preventative treatment of depressive episodes, and may be a cost-effective option in severe illness.

AIM

To present the first retrospective review of quetiapine use in a peri-urban health district of South Africa, describing the patient profile, clinical response and prescribing patterns.

METHODS

The clinical files of all patients in Sedibeng District who received quetiapine over a defined 3-year period (2011-2013) were reviewed. A positive clinical response was defined as both symptomatic and functional improvement. Demographic and clinical characteristics of responders were compared with that of non-responders. Pre- and post-quetiapine scripts of the responders were audited and costed.

RESULTS

Patients who received quetiapine (n = 40) had chronic disabling illness, often with multiple medication trials and hospitalisations prior to quetiapine use. Bipolar II disorder (followed by bipolar I disorder) was the most common primary psychiatric diagnosis documented. Other than improvement in functioning (p < 0.0001), responders differed significantly from non-responders in terms of a higher level of polypharmacy and a significant reduction in median number of medications from pre- to post-quetiapine (p = 0.0057).

CONCLUSION

Quetiapine use was associated with a highly significant improvement in functioning; however, it came at a 52% increase in medicine cost. Pre-quetiapine treatments, though, did not achieve an optimal level of functioning, and overall costs may be reduced by more rational prescribing habits.

Tracking medication changes to assess outcomes in comparative effectiveness research: A bipolar CHOICE study

BACKGROUND

Comparative effectiveness research uses multiple tools, but lacks outcome measures to assess large electronic medical records and claims data. Aggregate changes in medications in response to clinical need may serve as a surrogate outcome measure. We developed the Medication Recommendation Tracking Form (MRTF) to record the frequency, types, and reasons for medication adjustments in order to calculate Necessary Clinical Adjustments (NCAs), medication adjustments to reduce symptoms, maximize treatment response, or address problematic side effects.

METHODS

The MRTF was completed at every visit for 482 adult patients in Bipolar CHOICE, a 6-month randomized comparative effectiveness trial.

RESULTS

Responders had significantly fewer NCAs compared to non-responders. NCAs predicted subsequent response status such that every additional NCA during the previous visit decreased a patient's odds of response by approximately 30%. Patients with more severe symptoms had a greater number of NCAs at the subsequent visit. Patients with a comorbid anxiety disorder demonstrated a significantly higher rate of NCAs per month than those without a comorbid anxiety disorder. Patients with greater frequency, intensity, and interference of side effects had higher rates of NCAs. Participants with fewer NCAs reported a higher quality of life and decreased functional impairment.

LIMITATIONS

The MRTF has not been examined in community clinic settings and did not predict response more efficiently than the Clinical Global Impression-Bipolar Version (CGI-BP).

CONCLUSIONS

The MRTF is a feasible proxy of clinical outcome, with implications for clinical training and decision-making. Analyses of big data could use changes in medications as a surrogate outcome measure.

Update on bipolar disorder biomarker candidates

INTRODUCTION

Bipolar disorder is a chronic and disabling mood disorder with a complex pathophysiological basis. A significant percentage of patients do not receive correct diagnosis which directly influences therapeutic response, rendering recovery troublesome. There is a long-standing need for proper non-clinically based tools for diagnosis, treatment selection and follow-up of such patients. Areas covered: In the past decade, the scientific community has shown a great interest in biomarker development. Here, we highlight the different potential biomarkers and we discuss their feasibility and their possible clinical relevance. Expert commentary: To date, despite the major ongoing trials and consortia with promising future perspectives, no reliable biomarker of bipolar disorder has been fully defined.

Obesity, but not metabolic syndrome, negatively affects outcome in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

Examine the effects of obesity and metabolic syndrome on outcome in bipolar disorder.

METHOD

The Comparative Effectiveness of a Second Generation Antipsychotic Mood Stabilizer and a Classic Mood Stabilizer for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE) study randomized 482 participants with bipolar disorder in a 6-month trial comparing lithium- and quetiapine-based treatment. Baseline variables were compared between groups with and without obesity, with and without abdominal obesity, and with and without metabolic syndrome respectively. The effects of baseline obesity, abdominal obesity, and metabolic syndrome on outcomes were examined using mixed effects linear regression models.

RESULTS

At baseline, 44.4% of participants had obesity, 48.0% had abdominal obesity, and 27.3% had metabolic syndrome; neither obesity, nor abdominal obesity, nor metabolic syndrome were associated with increased global severity, mood symptoms, or suicidality, or with poorer functioning or life satisfaction. Treatment groups did not differ on prevalence of obesity, abdominal obesity, or metabolic syndrome. By contrast, among the entire cohort, obesity was associated with less global improvement and less improvement in total mood and depressive symptoms, suicidality, functioning, and life satisfaction after 6 months of treatment. Abdominal obesity was associated with similar findings. Metabolic syndrome had no effect on outcome.

CONCLUSION

Obesity and abdominal obesity, but not metabolic syndrome, were associated with less improvement after 6 months of lithium- or quetiapine-based treatment.