Aggression among 216 patients with a first-psychotic episode of bipolar I disorder

Background: Aggression by patients with bipolar I disorder (BD-I) is not uncommon. Identifying potential risk factors early in the illness-course should inform clinical management and reduce risk. Methods: In a study sample of 216 initially hospitalized, first-psychotic episode subjects diagnosed with DSM-IV-TR BD-I, we identified recent (within 1 month before hospitalization) aggression by ratings on the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale-Expanded and review of detailed clinical research records. We compared subjects with versus without aggressive behavior for associations with selected demographic and clinical factors. Results: Aggression was identified in 23/216 subjects (10.6%). It was associated significantly with recent suicide attempt (OR = 4.86), alcohol abuse (OR = 3.63), learning disability (OR = 3.14), and initial manic episode (OR = 2.59), but not with age, sex, onset-type, personality disorder, time to recovery, or functional status. Conclusions: Among first-major episode BD-I patients with psychotic features, recent serious aggression towards others was identified in 10.6%. The odds of aggression increased by 4.9-times in association with a recent suicide attempt, more than 3-times with alcohol-abuse or learning disability, and by 2.6-times if the episode polarity was manic. The findings encourage closer management of alcohol misuse, suicide risk, and manic symptoms, and early detection of learning problems in BD-I patients

Atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder: systematic review of randomised trials

Background: Atypical antipsychotics are increasingly used for treatment of mental illnesses like schizophrenia and bipolar disorder, and considered to have fewer extrapyramidal effects than older antipsychotics. Methods: We examined efficacy in randomised trials of bipolar disorder where the presenting episode was either depression, or manic/mixed, comparing atypical antipsychotic with placebo or active comparator, examined withdrawals for any cause, or due to lack of efficacy or adverse events, and combined all phases for adverse event analysis. Studies were found through systematic search (PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library), and data combined for analysis where there was clinical homogeneity, with especial reference to trial duration. Results: In five trials (2,206 patients) participants presented with a depressive episode, and in 25 trials (6,174 patients) the presenting episode was manic or mixed. In 8-week studies presenting with depression, quetiapine and olanzapine produced significantly better rates of response and symptomatic remission than placebo, with NNTs of 5-6, but more adverse event withdrawals (NNH 12). With mania or mixed presentation atypical antipsychotics produced significantly better rates of response and symptomatic remission than placebo, with NNTs of about 5 up to six weeks, and 4 at 6-12 weeks, but more adverse event withdrawals (NNH of about 22) in studies of 6-12 weeks. In comparisons with established treatments, atypical antipsychotics had similar efficacy, but significantly fewer adverse event withdrawals (NNT to prevent one withdrawal about 10). In maintenance trials atypical antipsychotics had significantly fewer relapses to depression or mania than placebo or active comparator. In placebo-controlled trials, atypical antipsychotics were associated with higher rates of weight gain of ≥7% (mainly olanzapine trials), somnolence, and extrapyramidal symptoms. In active controlled trials, atypical antipsychotics were associated with lower rates of extrapyramidal symptoms, but had higher rates of weight gain and somnolence. Conclusion: Atypical antipsychotics are effective in treating both phases of bipolar disorder compared with placebo, and as effective as established drug therapies. Atypical antipsychotics produce fewer extrapyramidal symptoms, but weight gain is more common (with olanzapine). There is insufficient data confidently to distinguish between different atypical antipsychotics.© 2007 Derry and Moore; licensee BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Citation: Derry, S. & Moore, R. A. (2007). 'Atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder: systematic review of randomised trials', BMC Psychiatry, 7:40. [Available at http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-244X/7/40]

Identifying patterns in treatment response profiles in acute bipolar mania: a cluster analysis approach

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Patients with acute mania respond differentially to treatment and, in many cases, fail to obtain or sustain symptom remission. The objective of this exploratory analysis was to characterize response in bipolar disorder by identifying groups of patients with similar manic symptom response profiles.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Patients (n = 222) were selected from a randomized, double-blind study of treatment with olanzapine or divalproex in bipolar I disorder, manic or mixed episode, with or without psychotic features. Hierarchical clustering based on Ward's distance was used to identify groups of patients based on Young-Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores at each of 5 assessments over 7 weeks. Logistic regression was used to identify baseline predictors for clusters of interest.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Four distinct clusters of patients were identified: Cluster 1 (n = 64): patients did not maintain a response (YMRS total scores ≤ 12); Cluster 2 (n = 92): patients responded rapidly (within less than a week) and response was maintained; Cluster 3 (n = 36): patients responded rapidly but relapsed soon afterwards (YMRS ≥ 15); Cluster 4 (n = 30): patients responded slowly (≥ 2 weeks) and response was maintained. Predictive models using baseline variables found YMRS Item 10 (Appearance), and psychosis to be significant predictors for Clusters 1 and 4 vs. Clusters 2 and 3, but none of the baseline characteristics allowed discriminating between Clusters 1 vs. 4. Experiencing a mixed episode at baseline predicted membership in Clusters 2 and 3 vs. Clusters 1 and 4. Treatment with divalproex, larger number of previous manic episodes, lack of disruptive-aggressive behavior, and more prominent depressive symptoms at baseline were predictors for Cluster 3 vs. 2.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Distinct treatment response profiles can be predicted by clinical features at baseline. The presence of these features as potential risk factors for relapse in patients who have responded to treatment should be considered prior to discharge.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>The clinical trial cited in this report has not been registered because it was conducted and completed prior to the inception of clinical trial registries.</p

Ritanserin as an adjunct to lithium and haloperidol for the treatment of medication-naive patients with acute mania: a double blind and placebo controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorder is a lifelong episodic condition characterized by mood swings between mania and depression. Several lines of evidence suggest that serotonin is likely to play a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder. Ritanserin, a 5-HT(2 )receptor antagonist, has been reported to have antipsychotic activity. In this 6-week double blind, placebo controlled study involving moderate to severe manic patients, we assessed the effects of ritanserin plus haloperidol in combination with lithium. METHODS: 45 patients aged between 21–43 were eligible to participate as they met the DSM-IV criteria for a current manic episode, on the basis of a clinical interview by an academician psychiatrist. In addition, a score of at least 20 points on the Young Mania rating Scale was required representing moderate to severe mania. Patients were randomly allocated lithium (1–1.2 mEq/L) + haloperidol (10 mg/day)+ ritanserin (10 mg/day) (Group A) or lithium (1–1.2 mEq/L)+ haloperidol (10 mg/day) + placebo (Group B) for a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were assessed by a third year psychiatry resident at baseline and 3, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 42 days after the medication started. All patients entered the hospital were not previously under any medication. The mean decrease in the Young Mania Rating Scale score from baseline was used as the main outcome measure of response of mania to treatment. The extrapyramidal symptoms were assessed using the Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale. Side effects were systematically recorded throughout the study and were assessed using a checklist. RESULTS: Young Mania Rating Scale total scores improved with ritanserin. The difference between the two protocols was significant as indicated by the effect of group and the between-subjects factor (F = 5.02, d.f. = 1, P = 0.03). The means Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale scores for the placebo group were higher than the ritanserin group and the difference was significant in day 42. The difference between the two groups in the frequency of side effects was not significant CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy of ritanserin to obtain a better improvement in patients with mania seems to support the 5-HT hypothesis of bipolar disorder

Multimorbidity in bipolar disorder and under-treatment of cardiovascular disease: a cross sectional study

Background: Individuals with serious mental disorders experience poor physical health, especially increased rates of cardiometabolic morbidity and premature morbidity. Recent evidence suggests that individuals with schizophrenia have numerous comorbid physical conditions which may be under-recorded and under-treated but to date very few studies have explored this issue for bipolar disorder. Methods:We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of a dataset of 1,751,841 registered patients within 314 primary-care practices in Scotland, U.K. Bipolar disorder was identified using Read Codes recorded within electronic medical records. Data on 32 common chronic physical conditions were also assessed. Potential prescribing inequalities were evaluated by analyzing prescribing data for coronary heart disease (CHD) and hypertension. Results: Compared to controls, individuals with bipolar disorder were significantly less likely to have no recorded physical conditions (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.54-0.63) and significantly more likely to have one physical condition (OR 1.27, 95% CI 1.16-1.39), two physical conditions (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.30-1.62) and three or more physical conditions (OR 1.44, 95% CI 1.30-1.64). People with bipolar disorder also had higher rates of thyroid disorders, chronic kidney disease, chronic pain, chronic obstructive airways disease and diabetes but, surprisingly, lower recorded rates of hypertension and atrial fibrillation. People with bipolar disorder and comorbid CHD or hypertension were significantly more likely to be prescribed no antihypertensive or cholesterol-lowering medications compared to controls, and bipolar individuals with CHD or hypertension were significantly less likely to be on 2 or more antihypertensive agents. Conclusions: Individuals with bipolar disorder are similar to individuals with schizophrenia in having a wide range of comorbid and multiple physical health conditions. They are also less likely than controls to have a primary-care record of cardiovascular conditions such as hypertension and atrial fibrillation. Those with a recorded diagnosis of CHD or hypertension were less likely to be treated with cardiovascular medications and were treated less intensively. This study highlights the high physical healthcare needs of people with bipolar disorder, and provides evidence for a systematic under-recognition and under-treatment of cardiovascular disease in this group

Treatment of bipolar disorder: a complex treatment for a multi-faceted disorder

Background: Manic-depression or bipolar disorder (BD) is a multi-faceted illness with an inevitably complex treatment. Methods: This article summarizes the current status of our knowledge and practice of its treatment. Results: It is widely accepted that lithium is moderately useful during all phases of bipolar illness and it might possess a specific effectiveness on suicidal prevention. Both first and second generation antipsychotics are widely used and the FDA has approved olanzapine, risperidone, quetiapine, ziprasidone and aripiprazole for the treatment of acute mania. These could also be useful in the treatment of bipolar depression, but only limited data exists so far to support the use of quetiapine monotherapy or the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination. Some, but not all, anticonvulsants possess a broad spectrum of effectiveness, including mixed dysphoric and rapid-cycling forms. Lamotrigine may be effective in the treatment of depression but not mania. Antidepressant use is controversial. Guidelines suggest their cautious use in combination with an antimanic agent, because they are supposed to induce switching to mania or hypomania, mixed episodes and rapid cycling. Conclusion: The first-line psychosocial intervention in BD is psychoeducation, followed by cognitive-behavioral therapy. Other treatment options include Electroconvulsive therapy and transcranial magnetic stimulation. There is a gap between the evidence base, which comes mostly from monotherapy trials, and clinical practice, where complex treatment regimens are the rule

Early stages of bipolar disorder: characterization and strategies for early intervention

Objective: To characterize the early stages of bipolar disorder (BD), defined as the clinical prodrome/subsyndromal stage and first-episode phase, and strategies for their respective treatment. Methods: A selective literature search of the PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, and ISI databases from inception until March 2014 was performed. Included in this review were articles that a) characterized prodromal and first-episode stages of BD or b) detailed efficacy and safety/tolerability of interventions in patients considered prodromal for BD or those with only one episode of mania/hypomania. Results: As research has only recently focused on characterization of the early phase of BD, there is little evidence for the effectiveness of any treatment option in the early phase of BD. Case management; individual, group, and family therapy; supportive therapy; and group psychoeducation programs have been proposed. Most evidence-based treatment guidelines for BD do not address treatment specifically in the context of the early stages of illness. Evidence for pharmacotherapy is usually presented in relation to illness polarity (i.e., manic/mixed or depressed) or treatment phase. Conclusions: Although early recognition and treatment are critical to preventing unfavorable outcomes, there is currently little evidence for interventions in these stages of BD