Pattern recognition analyses of brain activation elicited by happy and neutral faces in unipolar and bipolar depression

Objectives: Recently, pattern recognition approaches have been used to classify patterns of brain activity elicited by sensory or cognitive processes. In the clinical context, these approaches have been mainly applied to classify groups of individuals based on structural magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data. Only a few studies have applied similar methods to functional MRI (fMRI) data. Methods: We used a novel analytic framework to examine the extent to which unipolar and bipolar depressed individuals differed on discrimination between patterns of neural activity for happy and neutral faces. We used data from 18 currently depressed individuals with bipolar I disorder (BD) and 18 currently depressed individuals with recurrent unipolar depression (UD), matched on depression severity, age, and illness duration, and 18 age- and gender ratio-matched healthy comparison subjects (HC). fMRI data were analyzed using a general linear model and Gaussian process classifiers. Results: The accuracy for discriminating between patterns of neural activity for happy versus neutral faces overall was lower in both patient groups relative to HC. The predictive probabilities for intense and mild happy faces were higher in HC than in BD, and for mild happy faces were higher in HC than UD (all p < 0.001). Interestingly, the predictive probability for intense happy faces was significantly higher in UD than BD (p = 0.03). Conclusions: These results indicate that patterns of whole-brain neural activity to intense happy faces were significantly less distinct from those for neutral faces in BD than in either HC or UD. These findings indicate that pattern recognition approaches can be used to identify abnormal brain activity patterns in patient populations and have promising clinical utility as techniques that can help to discriminate between patients with different psychiatric illnesses.

Managing bipolar depression:a therapeutic challenge?

Most people with bipolar disorder first seek treatment for depressive rather than manic symptoms. However, effective management of bipolar depression remains a challenge. In this review, Celia Feetam highlights how bipolar depression differs from unipolar depression both in its characteristics and in the approach to its treatment. © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Anti-inflammatory agents in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE: Inflammation has been implicated in the risk, pathophysiology, and progression of mood disorders and, as such, has become a target of interest in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). Therefore, the objective of the current qualitative and quantitative review was to determine the overall antidepressant effect of adjunctive anti-inflammatory agents in the treatment of bipolar depression. METHODS: Completed and ongoing clinical trials of anti-inflammatory agents for BD published prior to 15 May 15 2015 were identified through searching the PubMed, Embase, PsychINFO, and Clinicaltrials.gov databases. Data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the antidepressant effect of adjunctive mechanistically diverse anti-inflammatory agents were pooled to determine standard mean differences (SMDs) compared with standard therapy alone. RESULTS: Ten RCTs were identified for qualitative review. Eight RCTs (n = 312) assessing adjunctive nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n = 53), omega-3 polyunsaturated fatty acids (n = 140), N-acetylcysteine (n = 76), and pioglitazone (n = 44) in the treatment of BD met the inclusion criteria for quantitative analysis. The overall effect size of adjunctive anti-inflammatory agents on depressive symptoms was -0.40 (95% confidence interval -0.14 to -0.65, p = 0.002), indicative of a moderate and statistically significant antidepressant effect. The heterogeneity of the pooled sample was low (I² = 14%, p = 0.32). No manic/hypomanic induction or significant treatment-emergent adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, a moderate antidepressant effect was observed for adjunctive anti-inflammatory agents compared with conventional therapy alone in the treatment of bipolar depression. The small number of studies, diversity of agents, and small sample sizes limited interpretation of the current analysis.

A cluster analytic approach to identifying predictors and moderators of psychosocial treatment for bipolar depression: results from STEP-BD

Background We sought to address how predictors and moderators of psychotherapy for bipolar depression - identified individually in prior analyses - can inform the development of a metric for prospectively classifying treatment outcome in intensive psychotherapy (IP) versus collaborative care (CC) adjunctive to pharmacotherapy in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program (STEP-BD) study. Methods We conducted post-hoc analyses on 135 STEP-BD participants using cluster analysis to identify subsets of participants with similar clinical profiles and investigated this combined metric as a moderator and predictor of response to IP. We used agglomerative hierarchical cluster analyses and k-means clustering to determine the content of the clinical profiles. Logistic regression and Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate whether the resulting clusters predicted or moderated likelihood of recovery or time until recovery. Results The cluster analysis yielded a two-cluster solution: 1) "less-recurrent/severe" and 2) "chronic/recurrent." Rates of recovery in IP were similar for less-recurrent/severe and chronic/recurrent participants. Less-recurrent/severe patients were more likely than chronic/recurrent patients to achieve recovery in CC (p=.040, OR=4.56). IP yielded a faster recovery for chronic/recurrent participants, whereas CC led to recovery sooner in the less-recurrent/severe cluster (p=.034, OR=2.62). Limitations Cluster analyses require list-wise deletion of cases with missing data so we were unable to conduct analyses on all STEP-BD participants. Conclusions A well-powered, parametric approach can distinguish patients based on illness history and provide clinicians with symptom profiles of patients that confer differential prognosis in CC vs. IP.

Medical burden, body mass index and the outcome of psychosocial interventions for bipolar depression

Objective: Individuals with bipolar disorder experience a disproportionately high incidence of medical co-morbidity and obesity. These health-related problems are a barrier to recovery from mood episodes and have been linked with unfavorable responses to pharmacological treatment. However, little is known about whether and how these characteristics affect responses to adjunctive psychotherapy. Method: Embedded in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder was a randomized controlled trial of psychotherapy for bipolar depression comparing the efficacy of intensive psychotherapy plus pharmacotherapy with collaborative care (a three-session psycho-educational intervention) plus pharmacotherapy. We conducted a post-hoc analysis to evaluate whether medical burden and body mass index predicted and/or moderated the likelihood of recovery and time until recovery from a depressive episode among patients in the two treatments. Results: Participants who had medical co-morbidity and body mass index data constituted 199 of the 293 patients in the original Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder trial. Higher medical burden predicted a lower likelihood of recovery from depression in both treatment conditions (odds ratio = 0.89), but did not moderate responses to intensive psychotherapy vs collaborative care. Intensive psychotherapy yielded superior recovery rates for individuals of normal body mass index (odds ratio= 2.39) compared with collaborative care, but not among individuals who were overweight or obese. Conclusion: Medical co-morbidity and body weight impacts symptom improvement and attention to this co-morbidity may inform the development of more personalized treatments for bipolar disorder.

Recognition, comorbidity, and outcome of DSM-IV bipolar I and II disorders in psychiatric care

This study is part of an ongoing collaborative bipolar research project, the Jorvi Bipolar Study (JoBS). The JoBS is run by the Department of Mental Health and Alcohol Research of the National Public Health Institute, Helsinki, and the Department of Psychiatry, Jorvi Hospital, Helsinki University Central Hospital (HUCH), Espoo, Finland. It is a prospective, naturalistic cohort study of secondary level care psychiatric in- and outpatients with a new episode of bipolar disorder (BD). The second report also included 269 major depressive disorder (MDD) patients from the Vantaa Depression Study (VDS). The VDS was carried out in collaboration with the Department of Psychiatry of the Peijas Medical Care District. Using the Mood Disorder Questionnaire (MDQ), all in- and outpatients at the Department of Psychiatry at Jorvi Hospital who currently had a possible new phase of DSM-IV BD were sought. Altogether, 1630 psychiatric patients were screened, and 490 were interviewed using a semistructured interview (SCID-I/P). The patients included in the cohort (n=191) had at intake a current phase of BD. The patients were evaluated at intake and at 6- and 18-month interviews. Based on this study, BD is poorly recognized even in psychiatric settings. Of the BD patients with acute worsening of illness, 39% had never been correctly diagnosed. The classic presentations of BD with hospitalizations, manic episodes, and psychotic symptoms lead clinicians to correct diagnosis of BD I in psychiatric care. Time of follow-up elapsed in psychiatric care, but none of the clinical features, seemed to explain correct diagnosis of BD II, suggesting reliance on cross- sectional presentation of illness. Even though BD II was clearly less often correctly diagnosed than BD I, few other differences between the two types of BD were detected. BD I and II patients appeared to differ little in terms of clinical picture or comorbidity, and the prevalence of psychiatric comorbidity was strongly related to the current illness phase in both types. At the same time, the difference in outcome was clear. BD II patients spent about 40% more time depressed than BD I patients. Patterns of psychiatric comorbidity of BD and MDD differed somewhat qualitatively. Overall, MDD patients were likely to have more anxiety disorders and cluster A personality disorders, and bipolar patients to have more cluster B personality disorders. The adverse consequences of missing or delayed diagnosis are potentially serious. Thus, these findings strongly support the value of screening for BD in psychiatric settings, especially among the major depressive patients. Nevertheless, the diagnosis must be based on a clinical interview and follow-up of mood. Comorbidity, present in 59% of bipolar patients in a current phase, needs concomitant evaluation, follow-up, and treatment. To improve outcome in BD, treatment of bipolar depression is a major challenge for clinicians.

Diferencias en la experiencia subjetiva entre depresión unipolar y bipolar

En la depresión unipolar el estado de ánimo predominante es la tristeza y la experiencia corporal es de un cuerpo que se siente más cómodo con la quietud que con la actividad, parecido a la pereza de la vida cotidiana. En la depresión bipolar el estado de ánimo predominante es de apagamiento emocional. La experiencia corporal es de un cuerpo pesado, cansado, un elemento que se interpone entre los deseos de actuar y la realización de las acciones y que se vuelve un obstáculo para el movimiento. Además, en la depresión bipolar hay mayor bradipsíquia, dificultad para concentrarse y desesperanza que en la unipolar. Se realizó una investigación de tipo cualitativo, exploratorio, de las experiencias subjetivas (de primera persona) de un grupo de pacientes con depresión unipolar y bipolar. Se utilizó entrevistas en profundidad de orientación fenomenológica.

Efectividad de la ketamina en depresión bipolar: revisión sistemática de la literatura

Introducción: Aunque el hallazgo clínico más distintivo del Trastorno Afectivo Bipolar es el ánimo patológicamente elevado, este no suele ser el estado de ánimo prevalente de la enfermedad. La fase depresiva del trastorno o depresión bipolar es más crónica, conlleva a un mayor deterioro de la funcionalidad y representa un reto terapéutico habitual. En la actualidad, el manejo farmacológico de la depresión bipolar suele consistir en combinaciones de al menos dos medicamentos distintos, incluyendo estabilizadores del afecto (litio y anticonvulsivantes), antipsicóticos atípicos y antidepresivos. El objetivo central de este trabajo es evaluar la efectividad de la Ketamina en la depresión bipolar. Métodos: Revisión sistemática de la literatura de artículos que proporcionen información sobre la eficacia de la Ketamina en la fase depresiva del Trastorno Bipolar. Resultados: De los 147 artículos arrojados por la búsqueda, dos cumplieron los criterios de selección (n=33). En comparación con placebo, ketamina tiene un efecto antidepresivo rápido y duradero, incluso en pacientes que han recibido más de 3 medicamentos previamente. No se reportaron efectos adversos severos durante los estudios. Discusión. La evidencia actual apunta a que la ketamina es útil para el manejo de la depresión bipolar, incluso cuando es resistente al tratamiento, es segura y puede tener cierto efecto antisuicida. Es necesario ampliar la evidencia existente.

N-acetyl cysteine for depressive symptoms in bipolar disorder - a double blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Background: Treatment-resistant subthreshold depression is a major problem in bipolar disorder. Both depression and bipolar disorderare complicated by glutathione depletion. We hypothesized that treatment with N-acetyl cysteine (NAC), a safe, orally bioavailable precursor of glutathione, may improve the depressive component of bipolar disorder.

Methods: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled study of individuals (n 75) with bipolar disorder in the maintenance phase treated with NAC (1 g twice daily) adjunctive to usual medication over 24 weeks, with a 4-week washout. The two primary outcomes were the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and time to a mood episode. Secondary outcomes included the Bipolar Depression Rating Scale and 11 other ratings of clinical status, quality of life, and functioning.

Results: NAC treatment caused a significant improvement on the MADRS (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]: 8.05 [13.16, 2.95], p .002) a n d most secondary scales at end point. Benefit was evident by 8 weeks on the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale and Social and Occupational Functioning Assessment Scale and at 20 weeks on the MADRS. Improvements were lost after washout. There was no effect of NAC on time to a mood episode (log-rank test: p .968) and no significant between-group differences inadverse events. Effect sizes at end point were medium to high for improvements in MADRS and 9 of the 12 secondary readouts.

Conclusions: NAC appears a safe and effective augmentation strategy for depressive symptoms in bipolar  disorder.

Diagnosing bipolar disorder : how can we do it better?

• Accurate diagnosis of bipolar disorder is essential for effective treatment.

• The diagnosis of bipolar disorder is particularly complex, resulting in lengthy delays between first presentation and initiation of appropriate therapy. Inappropriate therapy destabilises the course and outcome of the disease.

• Although the defining features of bipolar disorder are manic or hypomanic episodes, patients typically present for treatment of depression and commonly deny symptoms of mood elevation.

• A correct diagnosis can easily be masked by comorbidities, personality issues and complex phenomenology.

• A diagnosis of bipolar disorder can be assisted by:

   → asking about symptoms of mania or hypomania in every patient presenting with symptoms of depression.

   → recognising mixed states in which manic and depressive symptoms occur simultaneously.

   → identifying the features of bipolar depression that distinguish it from unipolar depression.

• There is a risk of over-diagnosis of bipolar disorder among patients who are histrionic, show abnormal illness behaviour MJA 2006; 184: 459–462 and/or have issues of secondary gain.

Bipolar missed states : the diagnosis and clinical salience of bipolar mixed states

Objective: To explore diagnostic and treatment issues concerning bipolar mixed states.

Method: Bipolar mixed states are described and concerns about diagnostic and treatment difficulties are summarized and discussed.

Result: Mixed states can present with equal admixtures of depressive or manic symptoms, or more commonly one component predominates. There is fair consensus, although little data, regarding the management of manic mixed states. However depressive mixed states are far more complex both in terms of recognition and management. People suffering from mixed states characteristically present with complaints of depression.

Conclusions: The boundaries between depressive mixed states and agitated depression are vague, yet carry substantial therapeutic implications. Bipolar mixed states are often difficult to treat, and tend to take much longer to settle than either pure mania or depression.  Furthermore there is data that treatment with antidepressants can worsen the course of mixed states. Hence missed diagnoses can potentially have negative clinical implications.  Therefore in this paper the clinical presentation, diagnosis and therapy of mixed states is reviewed with a view to improving management.

Health-related quality of life and functioning in bipolar disorder : the impact of pharmacotherapy

Bipolar disorder has a major deleterious impact on many aspects of a patient's functioning and health-related quality of life. Although the formal measurement of these deficits has been neglected until recently, many well-designed trials now include an assessment of functioning and health-related quality of life using one or more rating scales. This review describes recent developments in the measurement of functioning and health-related quality of life in bipolar disorder, and discusses the evidence that medications that improve symptoms in bipolar disorder also offer clinically relevant benefits in functioning and health-related quality of life. Direct comparisons of the benefits of medications including atypical antipsychotics are problematic due to differences in trial populations, study durations and rating scales. Data from quetiapine trials indicate that this medication offers prompt and sustained improvement of functioning in patients with mania and enhancement of health-related quality of life in patients with bipolar depression, to accompany the significant improvements in mood episodes.

The management of individuals with bipolar disorder : a review of the evidence and its integration into clinical practice

Bipolar disorder is a common, debilitating, chronic illness that emerges early in life and has serious consequences such as long-term unemployment and suicide. It confers considerable functional disability to the individual, their family and society as a whole and yet it is often undetected, misdiagnosed and treated poorly. In the past decade, many new treatment strategies have been trialled in the management of bipolar disorder with variable success. The emerging evidence, for pharmacological agents in particular, is promising but when considered alone does not directly translate to real-world clinical populations of bipolar disorder. Data from drug trials are largely based on findings that identify difterences between groups determined in a time-limited manner, whereas clinical management concerns the treatment of individuals over the life-long course of the illness. Considering the findings in the context of the individual and their particular needs perhaps besl bridges the gap between the evidence from research studies and their application in clinical practice. Specifically, only lithium and valproate have moderate or strong evidence for use across all three phases of bipolar disorder, Anticonvulsants, such as lamotrigine. have strong evidence in maintenance; whereas antipsychotics largely have strong evidence in acute mania, with the exception of quetiapine, which has strong evidence in bipolar depression. Maintenance data for antipsychotics is emerging but at present remains weak. Combinations have strong evidence in acute phases of illness but maintenance data is urgently needed. Conventional antidepressants only have weak evidence in bipolar depression and do not have a role in maintenance therapy. Therefore, this paper summarizes the efficacy data for treating bipolar disorder and also applies clinical considerations to these data when

Atypical antipsychotics for bipolar disorder : overblown or blown over?

Objective：Developments in the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder are of much interest, as the chronicity and disability of the disorder become better understood, and as treatment goals have shifted to emphasise early control of illness course and maintenance of euthymia in addition to acute episodic remission. Atypical antipsychotics have emerged as treatment options, and this paper aims to review the evidence for their role in bipolar disorder.

Methods：A MEDLINE search was conducted for publications up till October 2006.

Results：The search yielded a number of randomised, controlled clinical trials of various atypical antipsychotics as monotherapy or adjunctive therapy in bipolar disorder. The majority of such trials have investigated their efficacy in acute mania, with fewer studies devoted to acute bipolar depression or maintenance treatment. There are no specific trials on mixed states, which have mainly been studied together with bipolar mania. The most robust evidence supports a class effect of atypical agents in the treatment of mania.

Conclusions：There are placebo-controlled trials that support the efficacy of olanzapine and quetiapine in bipolar depression, and of olanzapine and aripiprazole as maintenance treatment. There is strong support for the role of atypical antipsychotics in bipolar disorder management despite a relatively narrow literature base, chiefly for the treatment of mania. However, these findings need to be replicated, and further investigation is warranted to clarify their spectrum of efficacy in bipolar disorder.

Balanced efficacy, safety, and tolerability recommendations for the clinical management of bipolar disorder

Objective:  To provide practical and clinically meaningful treatment recommendations that amalgamate clinical experience and research findings for each phase of bipolar disorder.

Methods:  A comprehensive search of the literature was undertaken using electronic database search engines (Medline, PubMed, Cochrane reviews) using key words (e.g., bipolar depression, mania, treatment). All relevant randomised controlled trials were examined, along with review papers, meta-analyses, and book chapters known to the authors. In addition, the recommendations from accompanying papers in this supplement have been distilled and captured in the form of summary boxes. The findings, in conjunction with the clinical experience of international researchers and clinicians who are practiced in treating mood disorders, formed the basis of the treatment recommendations within this paper.

Results:  Balancing clinical experience with evidence informed and lead to the development of practical clinical recommendations that emphasise the importance of safety and tolerability alongside efficacy in the clinical management of bipolar disorder.

Conclusions:  The current paper summarises the treatment recommendations relating to each phase of bipolar disorder while providing additional, evidence-based, practical insights. Medication-related side effects and monitoring strategies highlight the importance of safety and tolerability considerations, which, along with efficacy information, should be given equal merit.