The management of bipolar mania: a national survey of baseline data from the EMBLEM study in Italy

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Although a number of studies have assessed the management of mania in routine clinical practice, no studies have so far evaluated the short- and long-term management and outcome of patients affected by bipolar mania in different European countries.</p> <p>The objective of the study is to present, in the context of a large multicenter survey (EMBLEM study), an overview of the baseline data on the acute management of a representative sample of manic bipolar patients treated in the Italian psychiatric hospital and community settings. EMBLEM is a 2-year observational longitudinal study that evaluates across 14 European countries the patterns of the drug prescribed in patients with bipolar mania, their socio-demographic and clinical features and the outcomes of the treatment.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>The study consists of a 12-week acute phase and a ≤ 24-month maintenance phase. Bipolar patients were included into the study as in- or out-patients, if they initiated or changed, according to the decision of their psychiatrist, oral antipsychotics, anticonvulsants and/or lithium for the treatment of an episode of mania.</p> <p>Data concerning socio-demographic characteristics, psychiatric and medical history, severity of mania, prescribed medications, functional status and quality of life were collected at baseline and during the follow-up period.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>In Italy, 563 patients were recruited in 56 sites: 376 were outpatients and 187 inpatients. The mean age was 45.8 years. The mean CGI-BP was 4.4 (± 0.9) for overall score and mania, 1.9 (± 1.2) for depression and 2.6 (± 1.6) for hallucinations/delusions. The YMRS showed that 14.4% had a total score < 12, 25.1% ≥ 12 and < 20, and 60.5% ≥ 20. At entry, 75 patients (13.7%) were treatment-naïve, 186 (34.1%) were receiving a monotherapy (of which haloperidol [24.2%], valproate [16.7%] and lithium [14.5%] were the most frequently prescribed) while 285 (52.2%) a combined therapy (of which 8.0% were represented by haloperidol/lithium combinations). After a switch to an oral medication, 137 patients (24.8%) were prescribed a monotherapy while the rest (415, 75.2%) received a combination of drugs.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Data collected at baseline in the Italian cohort of the EMBLEM study represent a relevant source of information to start addressing the short and long-term therapeutic strategies for improving the clinical as well as the socio-economic outcomes of patients affected by bipolar mania. Although it's not an epidemiological investigation and has some limitations, the results show several interesting findings as a relatively late age of onset of bipolar disorder, a low rate of past suicide attempts, a low lifetime rate of alcohol abuse and drug addiction.</p

Adjunctive long-acting risperidone in patients with bipolar disorder who relapse frequently and have active mood symptoms

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The objective of this exploratory analysis was to characterize efficacy and onset of action of a 3-month treatment period with risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI), adjunctive to an individual's treatment regimen, in subjects with symptomatic bipolar disorder who relapsed frequently and had significant symptoms of mania and/or depression.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Subjects with bipolar disorder with ≥4 mood episodes in the past 12 months entered the open-label stabilization phase preceding a placebo-controlled, double-blind study. Subjects with significant depressive or manic/mixed symptoms at baseline were analyzed. Significant depressive symptoms were defined as Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) ≥16 and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) < 16; manic/mixed symptoms were YMRS ≥16 with any MADRS score. Subjects received open-label RLAI (25-50 mg every 2 weeks) for 16 weeks, adjunctive to a subject's individualized treatment for bipolar disorder (mood stabilizers, antidepressants, and/or anxiolytics). Clinical status was evaluated with the Clinical Global Impressions of Bipolar Disorder-Severity (CGI-BP-S) scale and changes on the MADRS and YMRS scales. Within-group changes were evaluated using paired <it>t </it>tests; categorical differences were assessed using Fisher exact test. No adjustment was made for multiplicity.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>162 subjects who relapsed frequently met criteria for significant mood symptoms at open-label baseline; 59/162 (36.4%) had depressive symptoms, 103/162 (63.6%) had manic/mixed symptoms. Most subjects (89.5%) were receiving ≥1 medication for bipolar disorder before enrollment. Significant improvements were observed for the total population on the CGI-BP-S, MADRS, and YMRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). Eighty-two (53.3%) subjects achieved remission at the week 16 LOCF end point. The subpopulation with depressive symptoms at open-label baseline experienced significant improvement on the CGI-BP-S and MADRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). Subjects with manic/mixed symptoms at baseline had significant improvements on the CGI-BP-S and YMRS scales (p < .001 vs. baseline, all variables). No unexpected tolerability findings were observed.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Exploratory analysis of changes in overall clinical status and depression/mania symptoms in subjects with symptomatic bipolar disorder who relapse frequently showed improvements in each of these areas after treatment with RLAI, adjunctive to a subject's individualized treatment. Prospective controlled studies are needed to confirm these findings.</p

Effects of asenapine on depressive symptoms in patients with bipolar I disorder experiencing acute manic or mixed episodes: a post hoc analysis of two 3-week clinical trials

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Asenapine demonstrated superiority over placebo for mania in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute current manic or mixed episodes in 2 randomized, placebo-and olanzapine-controlled trials. We report the results of exploratory pooled post hoc analyses from these trials evaluating asenapine's effects on depressive symptoms in patients from these trials with significant baseline depressive symptoms.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>In the original trials (A7501004 [NCT00159744], A7501005 [NCT00159796]), 977 patients were randomized to flexible-dose sublingual asenapine (10 mg twice daily on day 1; 5 or 10 mg twice daily thereafter), placebo, or oral olanzapine 5-20 mg once daily for 3 weeks. Three populations were defined using baseline depressive symptoms: (1) Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥20 (n = 132); (2) Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder-Depression (CGI-BP-D) scale severity score ≥4 (n = 170); (3) diagnosis of mixed episodes (n = 302) by investigative site screening. For each population, asenapine and olanzapine were independently compared with placebo using least squares mean change from baseline on depressive symptom measures.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Decreases in MADRS total score were statistically greater with asenapine versus placebo at days 7 and 21 in all populations; differences between olanzapine and placebo were not significant. Decreases in CGI-BP-D score were significantly greater with asenapine versus placebo at day 7 in all categories and day 21 in population 1; CGI-BP-D score reductions were significantly greater with olanzapine versus placebo at day 21 in population 1 and day 7 in populations 2 and 3.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>These post hoc analyses show that asenapine reduced depressive symptoms in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute manic or mixed episodes with clinically relevant depressive symptoms at baseline; olanzapine results appeared to be less consistent. Controlled studies of asenapine in patients with acute bipolar depression are necessary to confirm the generalizability of these findings.</p

Clinical management and burden of bipolar disorder: a multinational longitudinal study (WAVE-bd Study)

BACKGROUND: Studies in bipolar disorder (BD) to date are limited in their ability to provide a whole-disease perspective--their scope has generally been confined to a single disease phase and/or a specific treatment. Moreover, most clinical trials have focused on the manic phase of disease, and not on depression, which is associated with the greatest disease burden. There are few longitudinal studies covering both types of patients with BD (I and II) and the whole course of the disease, regardless of patients' symptomatology. Therefore, the Wide AmbispectiVE study of the clinical management and burden of Bipolar Disorder (WAVE-bd) (NCT01062607) aims to provide reliable information on the management of patients with BD in daily clinical practice. It also seeks to determine factors influencing clinical outcomes and resource use in relation to the management of BD. METHODS: WAVE-bd is a multinational, multicentre, non-interventional, longitudinal study. Approximately 3000 patients diagnosed with BD type I or II with at least one mood event in the preceding 12 months were recruited at centres in Austria, Belgium, Brazil, France, Germany, Portugal, Romania, Turkey, Ukraine and Venezuela. Site selection methodology aimed to provide a balanced cross-section of patients cared for by different types of providers of medical aid (e.g. academic hospitals, private practices) in each country. Target recruitment percentages were derived either from scientific publications or from expert panels in each participating country. The minimum follow-up period will be 12 months, with a maximum of 27 months, taking into account the retrospective and the prospective parts of the study. Data on demographics, diagnosis, medical history, clinical management, clinical and functional outcomes (CGI-BP and FAST scales), adherence to treatment (DAI-10 scale and Medication Possession Ratio), quality of life (EQ-5D scale), healthcare resources, and caregiver burden (BAS scale) will be collected. Descriptive analysis with common statistics will be performed. DISCUSSION: This study will provide detailed descriptions of the management of BD in different countries, particularly in terms of clinical outcomes and resources used. Thus, it should provide psychiatrists with reliable and up-to-date information about those factors associated with different management patterns of BD. TRIAL REGISTRATION NO: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01062607

Clinical correlates of loss of insight in bipolar depression

IntroductionAffective state may influence insight, especially regarding mania. Nevertheless, studies have so far suggested that depression seems not to significantly impair insight. To the best of our knowledge, this study pioneers the evaluation of how insight variations in bipolar depression correlate with clinical variables.MethodA group of 165 bipolar patients, 52 of whom had depressive episodes according to DSM-5 criteria, were followed during a year. All patients underwent clinical assessment, and insight was evaluated through the Insight Scale for Affective Disorders (ISAD). Repeated-measures ANOVA was calculated comparing scores on the four ISAD factors (insight into symptoms, the condition itself, self-esteem and social relationships) in order to investigate differences in insight according to different objects. Correlational analysis explored which clinical symptoms were linked to reduced insight.ResultsWorse total insight correlated with suicide attempt/ideation and fewer subsyndromal manic symptoms such as mood elevation, increased energy and sexual interest. Worse self-esteem insight was associated with not only suicide ideation/attempt but also with activity reduction and psychomotor retardation. Worse symptom insight also correlated with psychomotor retardation. Better insight into having an affective disorder was associated with more intense hypochondria symptoms. Finally, worse insight into having an illness was associated with psychotic episodes.ConclusionOur study found that symptoms other than psychosis – suicide ideation, psychomotor retardation and reduction of activity and work – correlate with insight impairment in bipolar depression

A 6 Week Randomized Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Trial of Ziprasidone for the Acute Depressive Mixed State

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of ziprasidone vs. placebo for the depressive mixed state in patients with bipolar disorder type II or major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: 73 patients were randomized in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to ziprasidone (40-160 mg/d) or placebo for 6 weeks. They met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode (MDE), while also meeting 2 or 3 (but not more nor less) DSM-IV manic criteria. They did not meet DSM-IV criteria for a mixed or manic episode. Baseline psychotropic drugs were continued unchanged. The primary endpoint measured was Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores over time. The mean dose of ziprasidone was 129.7±45.3 mg/day and 126.1±47.1 mg/day for placebo. RESULTS: The primary outcome analysis indicated efficacy of ziprasidone versus placebo (p = 0.0038). Efficacy was more pronounced in type II bipolar disorder than in MDD (p = 0.036). Overall ziprasidone was well tolerated, without notable worsening of weight or extrapyramidal symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: There was a statistically significant benefit with ziprasidone versus placebo in this first RCT of any medication for the provisional diagnostic concept of the depressive mixed state. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT00490542