Predictors of response to ziprasidone: results from a 6-week randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial for acute depressive mixed state

Pharmacological Treatment of Major Depressive Episodes with Mixed Features: A Systematic Review

We reviewed clinical studies investigating the pharmacological treatment of major depressive episodes (MDEs) with mixed features diagnosed according to the dimensional criteria (more than two or three [hypo]manic symptoms+principle depressive symptoms). We systematically reviewed published randomized controlled trials on the pharmacological treatment of MDEs with mixed features associated with mood disorders, including major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorder (BD). We searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases through December 2017 with the following key word combinations linked with the word OR: (a) mixed or mixed state, mixed features, DMX, mixed depression; (b) depressive, major depressive, MDE, MDD, bipolar, bipolar depression; and (c) antidepressant, antipsychotic, mood stabilizer, anticonvulsant, treatment, medication, algorithm, guideline, pharmacological. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. We found few randomized trials on pharmacological treatments for MDEs with mixed features. Of the 36 articles assessed for eligibility, 11 investigated MDEs with mixed features in mood disorders: six assessed the efficacy of antipsychotic drugs (lurasidone and ziprasidone) in the acute phase of MDD with mixed features, although four of these were post hoc analyses based on large randomized controlled trials. Four studies compared antipsychotic drugs (olanzapine, lurasidone, and ziprasidone) with placebo, and one study assessed the efficacy of combination therapy (olanzapine+fluoxetine) in the acute phase of BD with mixed features. Pharmacological treatments for MDEs with mixed features have focused on antipsychotics, although evidence of their efficacy is lacking. Additional well-designed clinical trials are needed.

The World Federation of Societies of Biological Psychiatry (WFSBP) Guidelines for the Biological Treatment of Bipolar Disorders: Acute and long-term treatment of mixed states in bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVES

Although clinically highly relevant, the recognition and treatment of bipolar mixed states has played only an underpart in recent guidelines. This WFSBP guideline has been developed to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence pertaining to the acute and long-term treatment of bipolar mixed states in adults.

METHODS

Material used for these guidelines is based on a systematic literature search using various data bases. Their scientific rigour was categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F), and different grades of recommendation to ensure practicability were assigned. We examined data pertaining to the acute treatment of manic and depressive symptoms in bipolar mixed patients, as well as data pertaining to the prevention of mixed recurrences after an index episode of any type, or recurrence of any type after a mixed index episode.

RESULTS

Manic symptoms in bipolar mixed states appeared responsive to treatment with several atypical antipsychotics, the best evidence resting with olanzapine. For depressive symptoms, addition of ziprasidone to treatment as usual may be beneficial; however, the evidence base is much more limited than for the treatment of manic symptoms. Besides olanzapine and quetiapine, valproate and lithium should also be considered for recurrence prevention.

LIMITATIONS

The concept of mixed states changed over time, and recently became much more comprehensive with the release of DSM-5. As a consequence, studies in bipolar mixed patients targeted slightly different bipolar subpopulations. In addition, trial designs in acute and maintenance treatment also advanced in recent years in response to regulatory demands.

CONCLUSIONS

Current treatment recommendations are still based on limited evidence, and there is a clear demand for confirmative studies adopting the DSM-5 specifier with mixed features concept.

Treatment of mixed features in bipolar disorder

Mood episodes with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5)-defined mixed features are highly prevalent in bipolar disorder (BD), affecting ~40% of patients during the course of illness. Mixed states are associated with poorer clinical outcomes, greater treatment resistance, higher rates of comorbidity, more frequent mood episodes, and increased rates of suicide. The objectives of the current review are to identify, summarize, and synthesize studies assessing the efficacy of treatments specifically for BD I and II mood episodes (ie, including manic, hypomanic, and major depressive episodes) with DSM-5-defined mixed features. Two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 6 post-hoc analyses were identified, all of which assessed the efficacy of second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) for the acute treatment of BD mood episodes with mixed features. Results from these studies provide preliminary support for SGAs as efficacious treatments for both mania with mixed features and bipolar depression with mixed features. However, there are inadequate data to definitively support or refute the clinical use of specific agents. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (eg, lithium and divalproex) have yet to have been adequately studied in DSM-5-defined mixed features. Further study is required to assess the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for BD mood episodes with mixed features.

Treatment recommendations for DSM-5-defined mixed features

The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-5) mixed features specifier provides a less restrictive definition of mixed mood states, compared to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR), including mood episodes that manifest with subthreshold symptoms of the opposite mood state. A limited number of studies have assessed the efficacy of treatments specifically for DSM-5-defined mixed features in mood disorders. As such, there is currently an inadequate amount of data to appropriately inform evidence-based treatment guidelines of DSM-5 defined mixed features. However, given the high prevalence and morbidity of mixed features, treatment recommendations based on the currently available evidence along with expert opinion may be of benefit. This article serves to provide these interim treatment recommendations while humbly acknowledging the limited amount of evidence currently available. Second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) appear to have the greatest promise in the treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) with mixed features. Conventional mood stabilizing agents (ie, lithium and divalproex) may also be of benefit; however, they have been inadequately studied. In the treatment of major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features, the comparable efficacy of antidepressants versus other treatments, such as SGAs, remains unknown. As such, antidepressants remain first-line treatment of MDD with or without mixed features; however, there are significant safety concerns associated with antidepressant monotherapy when mixed features are present, which merits increased monitoring. Lurasidone is the only SGA monotherapy that has been shown to be efficacious specifically in the treatment of MDD with mixed features. Further research is needed to accurately determine the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of treatments specifically for mood episodes with mixed features to adequately inform future treatment guidelines.

Atypical Antipsychotics in the Treatment of Acute Bipolar Depression with Mixed Features: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Meta-Analysis of Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trials

Evidence supporting the use of second generation antipsychotics (SGAs) in the treatment of acute depression with mixed features (MFs) associated with bipolar disorder (BD) is scarce and equivocal. Therefore, we conducted a systematic review and preliminary meta-analysis investigating SGAs in the treatment of acute BD depression with MFs. Two authors independently searched major electronic databases from 1990 until September 2015 for randomized (placebo-) controlled trials (RCTs) or open-label clinical trials investigating the efficacy of SGAs in the treatment of acute bipolar depression with MFs. A random-effect meta-analysis calculating the standardized mean difference (SMD) between SGA and placebo for the mean baseline to endpoint change in depression as well as manic symptoms score was computed based on 95% confidence intervals (CI). Six RCTs and one open-label placebo-controlled studies (including post-hoc reports) representing 1023 patients were included. Participants received either ziprasidone, olanzapine, lurasidone, quetiapine or asenapine for an average of 6.5 weeks across the included studies. Meta-analysis with Duval and Tweedie adjustment for publication bias demonstrated that SGA resulted in significant improvements of (hypo-)manic symptoms of bipolar mixed depression as assessed by the means of the total scores of the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) (SMD −0.74, 95% CI −1.20 to −0.28, n SGA = 907, control = 652). Meta-analysis demonstrated that participants in receipt of SGA (n = 979) experienced a large improvement in the Montgomery–Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) scores (SMD −1.08, 95% CI −1.35 to −0.81, p < 0.001) vs. placebo (n = 678). Publication and measurement biases and relative paucity of studies. Overall, SGAs appear to offer favorable improvements in MADRS and YMRS scores vs. placebo. Nevertheless, given the preliminary nature of the present report, additional original studies are required to allow more reliable and clinically definitive conclusions.

Can Atypical Antipsychotic Augmentation Reduce Subsequent Treatment Failure More Effectively Among Depressed Patients with a Higher Degree of Treatment Resistance? A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Atypical antipsychotic augmentation was demonstrated to be efficacious in treatment-resistant depression (TRD) in previous meta-analyses. We investigate whether there are differences in the effect size of atypical antipsychotic augmentation in major depressive disorder according to the degree of treatment resistance.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of four databases identified 11 randomized controlled trials. The 11 trials, which included 3 341 participants, were pooled using a random-effects meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Atypical antipsychotic augmentation of antidepressant therapy showed superior efficacy compared to antidepressant monotherapy in TRD in terms of both response and remission rates (response, risk ratio [RR] = 1.38, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.25 to 1.53; remission, RR = 1.62, 95% CI = 1.42 to 1.85). In addition, regarding response rates in the TRD trials, atypical antipsychotic augmentation exhibited significantly different effect sizes according to the degree of treatment resistance (TRD 1: RR = 1.24; TRD 2: RR = 1.37; TRD 2-4: RR = 1.58). In non-TRD trials, atypical antipsychotic augmentation failed to show superior efficacy over antidepressant monotherapy in terms of remission rates (RR = 0.89; 95% CI = 0.69 to 1.14). Atypical antipsychotic augmentation of antidepressant therapy exhibits greater effect size in patients with a higher degree of treatment resistance.

CONCLUSIONS

This finding strengthens the rationale for considering atypical antipsychotic augmentation among depressed patients with multiple previous treatment failures in clinical practice. The efficacy of atypical antipsychotic augmentation for non-TRD seems to be different from that for TRD and, thus, further studies of non-TRD populations are needed.

Evaluation of the pharmacokinetics, safety and clinical efficacy of ziprasidone for the treatment of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder

INTRODUCTION

Multiple strategies exist for the pharmacological treatment of schizophrenia and related disorders. In the last 20 years, several 'new' compounds have been introduced, called 'atypical antipsychotics', which have higher efficacy and better tolerability than first-generation neuroleptics. Among them, ziprasidone (ZPR) is currently finding widespread use, and it has also been shown to be active as an augmenter in bipolar disorder therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review aims to provide the latest information on ZPR, an 'atypical' agent for the pharmacological therapy of schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. A literature search has been carried out with the keywords 'ziprasidone', 'schizophrenia', 'psychosis', 'bipolar', 'pharmacokinetics' and 'clinical trials'. In this process, particular attention has been paid to the drug pharmacokinetic characteristics and its safety in clinical use.

EXPERT OPINION

ZPR shares most advantages and disadvantages with other atypical antipsychotics. However, it can be useful for its low tendency to cause metabolic syndrome and hyperprolactinaemia, especially in patients suffering from excess weight, hyperlipidaemia, diabetes or who have suffered from hyperprolactinaemia when using other antipsychotics. However, there are serious doubts as to whether ZPR should be administered to patients suffering from arrhythmias or QTc prolongation, and even more for administration to bipolar patients undergoing polypharmacy with antidepressants.

Dilemma for enhancing psychiatrists' adherence to guideline (evidence)-based practice

Bipolar disorder (BD) is a prevalent and chronic devastating disorder that is associated with considerable psychosocial and economic morbidity. However, its complexity in the clinical course and manifestation of bipolar disorder is still a significant barrier to accurate differential diagnosis from unipolar depression (UD), by which it is still underdiagnosed and undertreated in clinical practice. In community studies, first onset of BD is usually in the adolescent ages, and the occurrence of UD is usually its first clinical manifestation. In addition, reliable criteria for differentiating UD from BD along with validated treatment guidelines for BD are currently not sufficient or adequate, commonly resulting in misdiagnosis and mismanagement of both clinical conditions. Therefore, the study under evaluation results from clinician practice patterns in the real world will substantially enhance the current understanding on the actual situation and unmet needs for accurate and proper diagnosis and management of bipolar depression.