A placebo controlled study of quetiapine-XR in bipolar depression accompanied by generalized anxiety with and without a recent history of alcohol and cannabis use

Meta-analysis of the effects of adjuvant drugs in co-occurring bipolar and substance use disorder

BACKGROUND

Individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) often have co-occurring substance use disorders (SUDs), which substantially impoverish the course of illness. Despite the importance of this dual diagnosis, the evidence of the efficacy and safety of adjuvant treatments is mostly unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To perform a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs in patients with co-occurring BD and SUD.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Knowledge until 30th April 2022 for randomized clinical trials (RCT) evaluating the efficacy and safety of adjuvant drugs compared to placebo in patients with a dual diagnosis of BD and SUD. We meta-analyzed the effect of adjuvant drugs on general outcomes (illness severity, mania, depression, anxiety, abstinence, substance craving, substance use, gamma-GT, adherence, and adverse events) and used the results to objectively assess the quality of the evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. For completeness, we also report the specific effects of specific adjuvant drugs in patients with specific substance disorders.

RESULTS

We included 15 RCT studies (9 alcohol, 3 cocaine, 2 nicotine, and 1 cannabis) comprising 628 patients allocated to treatment and 622 to placebo. There was low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may reduce illness severity (g=-0.25, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.06), and very-low quality evidence that they may decrease substance use (g=-0.23, 95% CI: -0.44, -0.02) and increase substance abstinence (g=0.21, 95% CI: 0.04, 0.38).

DISCUSSION

There is low-quality evidence that adjuvant drugs may help reduce illness severity, probably via facilitating abstinence and lower substance use. However, the evidence is weak; thus, these results should be considered cautiously until better evidence exists.

How to quit cannabis when you have a mental illness: study from the perspective of patients who have successfully quit

AIMS AND METHOD

Research regarding quitting cannabis use often excludes patients with severe mental illness (SMI). We investigated facilitating and impeding factors in SMI patients and their advice to others, using semi-structured interviews with 12 SMI-patients, who were daily cannabis users for ≥12 months and had fully stopped using for ≥6 months.

RESULTS

Seeking distraction, social contacts in personal environment, avoiding temptation and support from professionals were facilitating factors in stopping. Impeding factors were withdrawal symptoms, user environment, experiencing stress and user's routine. Advice to other patients included to just do it, seek support from others, quit 'cold turkey' and acknowledge that cannabis use is a problem. Advice to mental health professionals is to discuss cannabis use from the start of treatment.

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

It is important to inform patients that cannabis use has negative consequences and limits the effects of treatment. Do not judge cannabis use or force the patient to stop.

Interventions for Co-occurring Cannabis Use and Depression

This review aimed to investigate the effective intervention options for depression in patients with a history of cannabis use. The study eligibility criteria were as follows: English-language, peer-reviewed human studies; data not previously reported elsewhere; randomized controlled trials, non-randomized trials comparing an intervention group and a control group, and single-group trials.

In total, eight studies of interventions for patients with depression who reported cannabis use were identified. Four studies evaluated the effectiveness of the following three pharmacological interventions: extended quetiapine release, extended venlafaxine release, and fluoxetine. However, all studies failed to demonstrate the effectiveness of these drugs. Four studies evaluated the following psychological interventions: motivational interviewing (MI) and cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). These studies found that CBT may improve depression symptoms and cannabis dependence, and MI was associated with improvements in cannabis dependence.

CBT and MI may be effective in improving depression and reducing cannabis use. However, the conclusions of this review are limited because of the small number of studies and their low quality. Higher-quality research is required to evaluate the effectiveness of CBT, MI, and other interventions for comorbid cannabis use and depression.

Bipolar Disorder and Comorbid Use of Illicit Substances

Substance use disorders (SUD) are highly prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD) and significantly affect clinical outcomes. Incidence and management of illicit drug use differ from alcohol use disorders, nicotine use of behavioral addictions. It is not yet clear why people with bipolar disorder are at higher risk of addictive disorders, but recent data suggest common neurobiological and genetic underpinnings and epigenetic alterations. In the absence of specific diagnostic instruments, the clinical interview is conducive for the diagnosis. Treating SUD in bipolar disorder requires a comprehensive and multidisciplinary approach. Most treatment trials focus on single drugs, such as cannabis alone or in combination with alcohol, cocaine, or amphetamines. Synopsis of data provides limited evidence that lithium and valproate are effective for the treatment of mood symptoms in cannabis users and may reduce substance use. Furthermore, the neuroprotective agent citicoline may reduce cocaine consumption in BD subjects. However, many of the available studies had an open-label design and were of modest to small sample size. The very few available psychotherapeutic trials indicate no significant differences in outcomes between BD with or without SUD. Although SUD is one of the most important comorbidities in BD with a significant influence on clinical outcome, there is still a lack both of basic research and clinical trials, allowing for evidence-based and specific best practices.

Quetiapine in the Anxiety Dimension of Mood Disorders: A Systematic Review of the Literature to Support Clinical Practice

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder and major depressive disorder are heterogeneous conditions characterized by marked variations in mood. High levels of anxiety are often present in these conditions and are associated with increased suicidal risk, increased disease duration, and treatment resistance. Mood stabilizers or antipsychotics are recommended for the treatment of bipolar disorder in comorbidity with anxiety disorders. This study examines current knowledge to evaluate the efficacy of quetiapine in the treatment of anxiety in mood disorders.

METHODS/PROCEDURES

A systematic review was conducted following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) and Cochrane guidelines, selecting randomized control trials that evaluated the efficacy of quetiapine on anxiety symptoms in patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder or major depressive disorder and included anxiety evaluation scales.

FINDINGS/RESULTS

We collected 27 studies (19 with primary data analysis, 8 with secondary data analysis) regarding the use of quetiapine in mood disorders. Quetiapine was more effective than placebo and active comparators in reducing anxiety in unipolar and bipolar patients in 20 of these studies. In 7 studies, quetiapine was not superior to psychoactive comparators or placebo on the anxiety dimension.

IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS

Statistical power might be limited by small sample size in 5 of the studies included in our review. Moreover, data on anxiety were a secondary outcome in most studies. Nevertheless, the reported studies show with good levels of concordance that quetiapine is effective in controlling anxiety symptoms in patients with mood disorders. This evidence supports current guidelines and recommendations concerning the use of quetiapine in clinical practice.

New Developments in the Use of Atypical Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Bipolar Disorder: a Systematic Review of Recent Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Atypical antipsychotics are increasingly used in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This systematic review provides an overview of recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on the efficacy and safety of atypical antipsychotics in BD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Several studies supported efficacy of quetiapine monotherapy in acute bipolar I (BDI) and bipolar II (BDII) depression. Moreover, quetiapine adjunctive therapy showed superior efficacy to placebo in treatment-resistant bipolar depression. Cariprazine 1.5 mg was effective in treating bipolar I depression. Aripiprazole 400 mg IM once monthly was effective in preventing manic episodes with minimal metabolic effects. In youth with BD, lurasidone was effective and well-tolerated for acute depression while asenapine showed efficacy in treating acute manic and mixed episodes. Recently published RCTs generally support the efficacy of atypical antipsychotics in different phases of BD. Future studies should focus on understudied populations including pediatric BD and geriatric BD and BDII, as well as a focus on cognitive functioning and quality of life measures.

Pharmacotherapies for co-occurring substance use and bipolar disorders: A systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Substance use disorders (SUDs), including those for alcohol, stimulants, tobacco, opioids and cannabis, in patients with bipolar disorder are a major clinical and public health problem, and are present in the majority of these patients. Nonetheless, the development of effective pharmacological treatments for co-occurring SUDs in bipolar illness have not been well-developed and may be an important practical reason for the reduced effectiveness of these medications in community practice.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature (PubMed, Medline, Google Scholar), and identified N = 29 clinical studies, which evaluated both mental health and SUD outcomes in patients with co-occurring bipolar disorders and SUDs.

RESULTS

Our findings suggest the potential of valproate sodium and lamotrigine as preferred pharmacological agents for the treatment of co-occurring psychiatric and substance use outcomes in these patients. However, many of the reviewed studies are of open-label designs and of modest sample sizes.

CONCLUSIONS

Thus, given the gaps in our knowledge, recommendations for treatment of this common and important co-morbidity are preliminary. Accordingly, the conduct of larger, randomized controlled trials for this co-morbidity is clearly needed.

Pharmacological and psychological interventions for generalized anxiety disorder in adults: A network meta-analysis

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a significant and common mental illness with a lifetime prevalence of 3.7%. Regardless of the complexity of treatment decisions for GAD, few studies have conducted systematic comparisons of the efficacies of varying interventions. Thus, this study performed a valid network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to synthesize direct and indirect evidence for alternative interventions for GAD. We searched four major bibliographic databases, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, PsycINFO, and PubMed, for published RCTs of adult patients with a diagnosis of GAD and allowed for all comorbidities. A total of 91 articles (14,812 participants) were identified in the final NMA. The results showed that all pharmacological treatments except for serotonin modulators and second-generation antipsychotics had greater effects than placebo: norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitors (standardized mean difference (SMD) -1.84, 95% credible interval -3.05 to -0.62), noradrenergic and specific serotonergic antidepressants (-0.91, -1.62 to -0.20), melatonergic receptor agonists (-0.68, -1.15 to -0.21), selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs; -0.67, -0.90 to -0.43), azapirones (-0.58, -1.00 to -0.17), anticonvulsants (-0.56, -0.85 to -0.28), serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs; -0.54, -0.79 to -0.30), and benzodiazepines (BZDs; -0.40, -0.65 to -0.15). Most psychological and self-help interventions exerted greater effects than the waitlist group. However, no psychological interventions had greater effects compared with the psychological placebo. Overall, most pharmacological interventions had larger effect sizes than psychological interventions, and most psychological interventions showed larger effect sizes than self-help interventions.

Treatment of substance use disorders with co-occurring severe mental health disorders

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide an update of treatment for substance use in patients with co-occurring substance use disorders (SUD) and mental health disorders (dual diagnosis) with a focus on both pharmacological and psychosocial interventions.

RECENT FINDINGS

A total of 1435 abstracts were identified, of which we selectively reviewed 43 for this narrative review. There is emerging evidence, both clinical and neurobiological, that clozapine is a more efficacious antipsychotic in treatment of individuals with schizophrenia and SUD. The use of depot atypical antipsychotic paliperidone palmitate in this population is also promising. Although valproate remains the treatment of choice in individuals with bipolar disorder and SUD, present evidence suggests that lithium and quetiapine may not be effective in this population. Naltrexone is the most effective anticraving agent in individuals with severe mental illness (SMI) and comorbid alcohol use disorders. The use of opioid substitution therapy in individuals with SMI and comorbid opioid use disorders is also associated with favorable outcomes. Varenicline shows promise in patients with SMI who smoke tobacco. Psychosocial interventions should be instituted early in the course of treatment. They should ideally be high intensity and based on established therapies used for SUD.

SUMMARY

The paucity of systematic studies in individuals with co-occurring mental health disorders and SUD remains a concern, given the enormous burden that they pose. However, there are a number of studies which have evaluated interventions, both psychosocial and pharmacological, which show promise and can guide clinical practice. VIDEO ABSTRACT: http://links.lww.com/YCO/A49.

Prospects for pharmacotherapies to treat alcohol use disorder: an update on recent human studies

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The aim of this study was to provide an update on medication development efforts for alcohol use disorder (AUD) by reviewing recently published (past 2 years) human studies that evaluated medications' effects on alcohol-related outcomes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Forty-five publications were found suitable for this review. A variety of compounds have been tested in the past 2 years as potential pharmacological options for AUD, including medications that act on multiple targets (topiramate, aripiprazole, quetiapine), calcium channels (gabapentin), gamma-Aminobutyric acid receptors (baclofen, diazepam), glutamate receptors (ifenprodil, memantine, glycine), nicotinic acetylcholine receptors (varenicline, mecamylamine), α1 adrenergic receptors (prazosin, doxazosin), neuroendocrine pathways (oxytocin, a vasopressin receptor 1b antagonist, a ghrelin receptor inverse agonist) and others (samidorphan, ibudilast, N-acetylcysteine, citoline). Important findings and limitations regarding the effects of these medications on alcohol-related outcomes are discussed.

SUMMARY

There is a critical need to increase the armamentarium of medications for AUD. Human laboratory studies may help screen and prioritize promising targets and compounds before running large clinical trials. Given the complexity of AUD and the heterogeneity of afflicted patients, future studies should also investigate potential moderators and predictors of response to each pharmacological intervention.

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.