A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled pilot study of naltrexone in outpatients with bipolar disorder and alcohol dependence

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.

Triple Diagnosis of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder with Coexisting Bipolar and Alcohol Use Disorders: Clinical Aspects and Pharmacological Treatments

Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), Bipolar Disorder (BD) and Alcohol Use Disorder (AUD) are common medical conditions often coexisting and exerting mutual influence on disease course and pharmacological treatment response. Each disorder, when considered separately, relies on different therapeutic approaches, making it crucial to detect the plausible association between them. Treating solely the emerging condition (e.g., alcoholism) and disregarding the patient's whole psychopathological ground often leads to treatment failure and relapse. Clinical experience and scientific evidence rather show that tailoring treatments for these three conditions considering their co-occurrence as a sole complex disorder yields more fulfilling and durable clinical outcomes. In light of the above considerations, the purpose of the present review is to critically discuss the pharmacological strategies in the personalized treatment of complex conditions defined by ADHD-bipolarityalcoholism coexistence.

Comorbidities in Youth with Bipolar Disorder: Clinical Features and Pharmacological Management

BACKGROUND

Bipolar Disorder (BD) is a highly comorbid condition, and rates of cooccurring disorders are even higher in youth. Comorbid disorders strongly affect clinical presentation, natural course, prognosis, and treatment.

METHODS

This review focuses on the clinical and treatment implications of the comorbidity between BD and Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder, disruptive behavior disorders (Oppositional Defiant Disorder and/or Conduct Disorder), alcohol and substance use disorders, Autism Spectrum Disorder, anxiety disorders, Obsessive-Compulsive Disorder, and eating disorders.

RESULTS

These associations define specific conditions which are not simply a sum of different clinical pictures, but occur as distinct and complex combinations with specific developmental pathways over time and selective therapeutic requirements. Pharmacological treatments can improve these clinical pictures by addressing the comorbid conditions, though the same treatments may also worsen BD by inducing manic or depressive switches.

CONCLUSION

The timely identification of BD comorbidities may have relevant clinical implications in terms of symptomatology, course, treatment and outcome. Specific studies addressing the pharmacological management of BD and comorbidities are still scarce, and information is particularly lacking in children and adolescents; for this reason, the present review also included studies conducted on adult samples. Developmentally-sensitive controlled clinical trials are thus warranted to improve the prognosis of these highly complex patients, requiring timely and finely personalized therapies.

The pharmacotherapeutic management of comorbid bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder

INTRODUCTION

Comorbidity of bipolar disorder (BD) and alcohol use disorder (AUD) is very frequent resulting in detrimental outcomes, including increased mortality. Diagnosis of AUD in BD and vice versa is often delayed as symptoms of one disorder mimic and obscure the other one. Evidence for pharmacotherapies for people with comorbid BD and AUD remains limited, and further proof-of-concept studies are urgently needed.

AREAS COVERED

This paper explores the currently available pharmacotherapies for AUD, BD and their usefulness for comorbid BD and AUD. It also covers to some degree the epidemiology, diagnosis, and potential common neurobiological traits of comorbid BD and AUD.

EXPERT OPINION

The authors conclude that more controlled studies are needed before evidence-based guidance can be drawn up for clinician's use. Since there are no relevant pharmacological interactions, approved medications for AUD can also be used safely in BD. For mood stabilization, lithium should be considered first in adherent persons with BD and comorbid AUD. Alternatives include valproate, lamotrigine, and some atypical antipsychotics, with partial D2/D3 receptor agonism possibly being beneficial in AUD, too.

Effect of extended-release naltrexone on alcohol consumption: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

The aims of this study were to (1) estimate the effect of extended-release naltrexone compared with placebo on alcohol consumption in patients with alcohol use disorder (AUD) and (2) conduct pre-planned subgroup analyses to test whether being abstinent when initiating treatment (lead-in abstinence) or the duration of treatment improves treatment efficacy.

DESIGN

Systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis of blinded randomized placebo-controlled trials reporting the effect extended-release naltrexone on alcohol consumption.

SETTING

Outpatient clinics.

PARTICIPANTS

Seven trials evaluating a total of 1500 adults with AUD receiving monthly injections of either placebo or extended-release naltrexone at doses of 150-400 mg for 2-6 months and some form of behavioral therapy.

MEASUREMENTS

Pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) in drinking days per month and heavy drinking days per month.

FINDINGS

The WMD was -2.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) = -3.4, -0.6; P = 0.03] in favor of extended-release naltrexone for drinking days per month and -1.2 (95% CI = -0.2, -2.1; P = 0.02) for heavy drinking days per month, indicating that treatment resulted in two fewer drinking days per month and 1.2 fewer heavy drinking days per month compared with placebo. Trials not requiring lead-in abstinence and those lasting longer than 3 months reported larger reductions in heavy drinking days per month; WMD -2.0 (95% CI = -3.52, -0.48; P = 0.01) and -1.9 (95% CI = -3.2, -0.5; P = 0.01), respectively. In all cases, the I² statistics (0-7.2%) did not suggest substantial heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

Extended-release naltrexone reduces drinking days and heavy drinking days per month compared with placebo. Reductions are larger with a longer duration of treatment.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled proof-of-concept study of ondansetron for bipolar and related disorders and alcohol use disorder

Bipolar disorder is associated with high rates of alcohol use disorder. However, little is known about the treatment of this dual diagnosis population. Previous studies suggest that ondansetron decreases alcohol use, particularly in people with specific single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) alleles. A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ondansetron was conducted in 70 outpatients with bipolar spectrum disorders and early onset alcohol use disorder. Outcome measures included alcohol use, assessed with the Timeline Followback method, Penn Alcohol Craving Scale (PACS), Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-report, and Young Mania Rating Scale. SNPs rs1042173, rs1176713 and rs1150226 were explored as predictors of response. Participants had a mean age of 44.9 ± 9.4 years, were mostly men (60.0%), and African American (51.4%). Mean ondansetron exit dose was 3.23 ± 2.64 mg. No significant between-group differences in alcohol use measures were observed. However, a significant reduction in HRSD scores was observed (p = 0.045). Inclusion of SNPs increased effect sizes for some alcohol-related outcomes and the HRSD. Ondansetron was well tolerated. This proof-of-concept study is the first report on ondansetron in bipolar people with bipolar disorders and alcohol use disorder. Alcohol use did not demonstrate a significant between-group difference. However, the findings suggest that ondansetron may be associated with reduction in depressive symptom severity in persons with bipolar illnesses and alcohol use disorder. A larger trial is needed to examine the effects of ondansetron on bipolar depression.

A multidisciplinary approach to the management of liver disease and alcohol disorders in psychiatric settings (Review)

Society is burdened with the uncontrolled use of alcohol, an ongoing issue, with a substantial associated morbidity and a pressing economical reverberation. It is inevitable that a series of psychiatric patients who display alcohol disorders will be admitted to hospital while also suffering from health conditions, such as liver disease, due to the consumption of alcohol. Managing comorbid patients in a psychiatric facility is a delicate matter that requires a collaborative team. The aim of this systematic paper is to highlight the following: The possibility of treating alcohol use disorder (AUD) and alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) overlapping alcohol liver disease (ALD) within a psychiatric institution, and the importance of a collaborative multidisciplinary team; correctly dosing psychoactive medication when metabolism is affected by ALD; deciding when is it necessary to seek a transfer to a general hospital. Prescribing medication in patients suffering from ALD is still a not a fully documented territory. Protein binding, metabolism, bioavailability, extraction ratios, excretion route, and half-life must be taken into consideration as well as frequently repeating liver panels. Studies suggest that short-acting benzodiazepines are preferred over their alternatives when treating AWS in ALD. All anticonvulsants can be used in patients with decompensated liver disease with caution, although newer generation antiepileptic agents should be first line. Propofol is favored to benzodiazepines or opioids in the case of decompensated cirrhosis. Patients with ALD are likely to be further compromised by the potential hepatocytotoxicity of some pharmacological agents. On that account, having an integrated perspective of the medical case while taking into consideration the underlying illness as well as possible drug interaction is crucial in treating AUD or AWS in a psychiatric institution.

Comorbid Bipolar and Alcohol Use Disorder-A Therapeutic Challenge

Comorbidity rates in Bipolar disorder rank highest among major mental disorders, especially comorbid substance use. Besides cannabis, alcohol is the most frequent substance of abuse as it is societally accepted and can be purchased and consumed legally. Estimates for lifetime comorbidity of bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder are substantial and in the range of 40-70%, both for Bipolar I and II disorder, and with male preponderance. Alcohol use disorder and bipolarity significantly influence each other's severity and prognosis with a more complicated course of both disorders. Modern treatment concepts acknowledge the interplay between these disorders using an integrated therapy approach where both disorders are tackled in the same setting by a multi-professional team. Motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral and socio- therapies incorporating the family and social environment are cornerstones in psychotherapy whereas the accompanying pharmacological treatment aims to reduce craving and to optimize mood stability. Adding valproate to lithium may reduce alcohol consumption whereas studies with antipsychotics or naltrexone and acamprosate did not affect mood fluctuations or drinking patterns. In summary, there is a continuous need for more research in order to develop evidence-based approaches for integrated treatment of this frequent comorbidity.

Pharmacological Treatment of Mood Disorders and Comorbid Addictions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis: Traitement Pharmacologique des Troubles de L'humeur et des Dépendances Comorbides: Une Revue Systématique et une Méta-Analyse

OBJECTIVE

Addiction comorbidity is an important clinical challenge in mood disorders, but the best way of pharmacologically treating people with mood disorders and addictions remains unclear. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy of pharmacological treatments for mood and addiction symptoms in people with mood disorders and addiction comorbidity.

METHODS

A systematic search of placebo-controlled randomized controlled trials investigating the effects of pharmacological treatments in people with bipolar disorder (BD) or major depressive disorder (MDD), and comorbid addictions was performed. Treatment-related effects on mood and addiction measures were assessed in a meta-analysis, which also estimated risks of participant dropout and adverse effects.

RESULTS

A total of 32 studies met systematic review inclusion criteria. Pharmacological therapy was more effective than placebo for improving manic symptoms (standardized mean difference [SMD] = -0.15; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -0.29 to -0.02; P = 0.03) but not BD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.09; 95% CI, -0.22 to 0.03; P = 0.15). Quetiapine significantly improved manic symptoms (SMD = -0.23; 95% CI, -0.39 to -0.06; P = 0.008) but not BD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.07; 95% CI, -0.23 to 0.10; P = 0.42). Pharmacological therapy was more effective than placebo for improving depressive symptoms in MDD (SMD = -0.16; 95% CI, -0.30 to -0.03; P = 0.02). Imipramine improved MDD depressive symptoms (SMD = -0.58; 95% CI, -1.03 to -0.13; P = 0.01) but Selective serotonin reuptake Inhibitors (SSRI)-based treatments had no effect (SMD = -0.06; 95% CI, -0.30 to 0.17; P = 0.60). Pharmacological treatment improved the odds of alcohol abstinence in MDD but had no effects on opiate abstinence.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacological treatments were significantly better than placebo in improving manic symptoms, MDD depressive symptoms, and alcohol abstinence but were not better for bipolar depression symptoms. Importantly, quetiapine was not more effective than placebo in improving bipolar depression symptoms nor were SSRI's for the treatment of MDD depression. Our findings highlight the need for further high-quality clinical trials of treatments for mood disorders and comorbid addictions.

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program: An update on bipolar depression

BACKGROUND

The Psychopharmacology Algorithm Project at the Harvard South Shore Program (PAPHSS) published algorithms for bipolar depression in 1999 and 2010. Developments over the past 9 years suggest that another update is needed.

METHODS

The 2010 algorithm and associated references were reevaluated. A literature search was conducted on PubMed for recent studies and review articles to see what changes in the recommendations were justified. Exceptions to the main algorithm for special patient populations, including those with attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance use disorders, anxiety disorders, and women of childbearing potential, and those with common medical comorbidities were considered.

RESULTS

Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is still the first-line option for patients in need of urgent treatment. Five medications are recommended for early usage in acute bipolar depression, singly or in combinations when monotherapy fails, the order to be determined by considerations such as side effect vulnerability and patient preference. The five are lamotrigine, lurasidone, lithium, quetiapine, and cariprazine. After trials of these, possible options include antidepressants (bupropion and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors are preferred) or valproate (very small evidence-base). In bipolar II depression, the support for antidepressants is a little stronger but depression with mixed features and rapid cycling would usually lead to further postponement of antidepressants. Olanzapine+fluoxetine, though Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved for bipolar depression, is not considered until beyond this point, due to metabolic side effects. The algorithm concludes with a table of other possible treatments that have some evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This revision incorporates the latest FDA-approved treatments (lurasidone and cariprazine) and important new studies and organizes the evidence systematically.

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.

Primary care management of cardiovascular risk for people with severe mental illnesses: the Primrose research programme including cluster RCT

Background

Effective interventions are needed to prevent cardiovascular disease (CVD) in people with severe mental illnesses (SMI) because their risk of CVD is higher than that of the general population.

Objectives

(1) Develop and validate risk models for predicting CVD events in people with SMI and evaluate their cost-effectiveness, (2) develop an intervention to reduce levels of cholesterol and CVD risk in SMI and (3) test the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of this new intervention in primary care.

Design

Mixed methods with patient and public involvement throughout. The mixed methods were (1) a prospective cohort and risk score validation study and cost-effectiveness modelling, (2) development work (focus groups, updated systematic review of interventions, primary care database studies investigating statin prescribing and effectiveness) and (3) cluster randomised controlled trial (RCT) assessing the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a new practitioner-led intervention, and fidelity assessment of audio-recorded appointments.

Setting

General practices across England.

Participants

All studies included adults with SMI (schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or other non-organic psychosis). The RCT included adults with SMI and two or more CVD risk factors.

Interventions

The intervention consisted of 8–12 appointments with a practice nurse/health-care assistant over 6 months, involving collaborative behavioural approaches to CVD risk factors. The intervention was compared with routine practice with a general practitioner (GP).

Main outcome measures

The primary outcome for the risk score work was CVD events, in the cost-effectiveness modelling it was quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and in the RCT it was level of total cholesterol.

Data sources

Databases studies used The Health Improvement Network (THIN). Intervention development work included focus groups and systematic reviews. The RCT collected patient self-reported and routine NHS GP data. Intervention appointments were audio-recorded.

Results

Two CVD risk score models were developed and validated in 38,824 people with SMI in THIN: the Primrose lipid model requiring cholesterol levels, and the Primrose body mass index (BMI) model with no blood test. These models performed better than published Cox Framingham models. In health economic modelling, the Primrose BMI model was most cost-effective when used as an algorithm to drive statin prescriptions. Focus groups identified barriers to, and facilitators of, reducing CVD risk in SMI including patient engagement and motivation, staff confidence, involving supportive others, goal-setting and continuity of care. Findings were synthesised with evidence from updated systematic reviews to create the Primrose intervention and training programme. THIN cohort studies in 16,854 people with SMI demonstrated that statins effectively reduced levels of cholesterol, with similar effect sizes to those in general population studies over 12–24 months (mean decrease 1.2 mmol/l). Cluster RCT: 76 GP practices were randomised to the Primrose intervention (n = 38) or treatment as usual (TAU) (n = 38). The primary outcome (level of cholesterol) was analysed for 137 out of 155 participants in Primrose and 152 out of 172 in TAU. There was no difference in levels of cholesterol at 12 months [5.4 mmol/l Primrose vs. 5.5 mmol/l TAU; coefficient 0.03; 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.22 to 0.29], nor in secondary outcomes related to cardiometabolic parameters, well-being or medication adherence. Mean cholesterol levels decreased over 12 months in both arms (–0.22 mmol/l Primrose vs. –0.39 mmol/l TAU). There was a significant reduction in the cost of inpatient mental health attendances (–£799, 95% CI –£1480 to –£117) and total health-care costs (–£895, 95% CI –£1631 to –£160; p = 0.012) in the intervention group, but no significant difference in QALYs (–0.011, 95% CI –0.034 to 0.011). A total of 69% of patients attended two or more Primrose appointments. Audiotapes revealed moderate fidelity to intervention delivery (67.7%). Statin prescribing and adherence was rarely addressed.

Limitations

RCT participants and practices may not represent all UK practices. CVD care in the TAU arm may have been enhanced by trial procedures involving CVD risk screening and feedback.

Conclusions

SMI-specific CVD risk scores better predict new CVD if used to guide statin prescribing in SMI. Statins are effective in reducing levels of cholesterol in people with SMI in UK clinical practice. This primary care RCT evaluated an evidence-based practitioner-led intervention that was well attended by patients and intervention components were delivered. No superiority was shown for the new intervention over TAU for level of cholesterol, but cholesterol levels decreased over 12 months in both arms and the intervention showed fewer inpatient admissions. There was no difference in cholesterol levels between the intervention and TAU arms, which might reflect better than standard general practice care in TAU, heterogeneity in intervention delivery or suboptimal emphasis on statins.

Future work

The new risk score should be updated, deployed and tested in different settings and compared with the latest versions of CVD risk scores in different countries. Future research on CVD risk interventions should emphasise statin prescriptions more. The mechanism behind lower costs with the Primrose intervention needs exploring, including SMI-related training and offering frequent support to people with SMI in primary care.

Trial registration

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13762819.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Programme Grants for Applied Research programme and will be published in full in Programme Grants for Applied Research; Vol. 7, No. 2. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. Professor David Osborn is supported by the University College London Hospital NIHR Biomedical Research Centre and he was also in part supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) North Thames at Barts Health NHS Trust.

Study characteristics influence the efficacy of substance abuse treatments: A meta-analysis of medications for alcohol use disorder

BACKGROUND

Understanding study characteristics' influence on treatment efficacy could improve methodologies and interpretation of findings. We examine study characteristics as predictors of outcomes in clinical trials of medications for alcohol problems.

METHODS

We obtained data on 23 trials of naltrexone and 22 trials of acamprosate from Cochrane reviews. We extracted data for 14 study characteristics and 3 dependent variables (odds ratio; percent abstinent in placebo; medication conditions). We used general linear models to determine which study characteristics explained the variability among outcomes after controlling for medication characteristics.

RESULTS

Study characteristics accounted for 45% of the variance in odds ratio when trials of different medications were combined, 19% among acamprosate, and 48% among naltrexone trials above and beyond medication characteristics. When medications were combined, greater odds ratios were predicted by having more dropouts in the placebo than medication conditions, an earlier publication year, and not receiving industry funding. Whether this was due to effects on placebo or medication conditions was unclear. Among acamprosate trials, smaller sample sizes predicted greater odds ratios, which appeared to be due to more abstinence in medication conditions. Among naltrexone trials, greater odds ratios were predicted by having more dropouts in the placebo than medication conditions and a greater probability of randomizing participants to treatment. This appeared to be due to less abstinence in placebo conditions.

CONCLUSION

Study characteristics influence the assessment of treatment efficacy beyond medication characteristics in alcohol treatment trials. Future studies are needed to determine which study characteristics reliably influence efficacy to help investigators design and help clinicians interpret trials.

Adding Psychotherapy to the Naltrexone Treatment of Alcohol Use Disorder: Meta-analytic Review

Background

It remains unclear if naltrexone combined with psychotherapy is superior to naltrexone alone in treating alcohol use disorders (AUD). The current meta-analysis examined the hypothesis that psychotherapy is a significant moderator that influences AUD-related outcomes and that naltrexone combined with psychotherapy is associated with significantly better AUD-related outcomes than naltrexone alone.

Methods

A total of 30 studies (N_naltrexone = 2317; N_placebo = 2056) were included. Random effects model meta-analyses were carried out for each of the studied outcomes. Subsequently, the random effects model pooled estimates from studies with and without psychotherapy were compared using a Wald test. A mixed-effect model, incorporating psychotherapy as a moderator, was used to examine the impact of psychotherapy on treatment outcomes.

Results

Naltrexone had a significant treatment effect on abstinence relapse and Gamma-Glutamyl Transferase levels, but not cravings. The pooled estimates for studies with and without psychotherapy were not significantly different for any of the studied outcomes. Psychotherapy was not a significant moderator in the mixed effects models for any of the studied outcomes.

Conclusions

Naltrexone treatment is efficacious in reducing alcohol consumption, but not reducing cravings. Adding psychotherapy on top naltrexone did not result in any significant additional benefit for AUD patients.

Medication-Assisted Treatment for Alcohol-Dependent Adults With Serious Mental Illness and Criminal Justice Involvement: Effects on Treatment Utilization and Outcomes

OBJECTIVE

Adults with serious mental illness and comorbid alcohol dependence are at high risk for both high utilization of crisis-driven health care services and criminal justice involvement. Evidence-based medication-assisted treatment (MAT) for alcohol dependence may reduce both crisis service utilization and criminal recidivism. The authors estimated the effect of MAT on behavioral health treatment utilization and criminal justice outcomes for this population.

METHOD

Relevant administrative data were merged from several public agencies in Connecticut for 5,743 adults ≥18 years old who had schizophrenia spectrum disorder, bipolar disorder, or major depressive disorder comorbid with moderate to severe alcohol dependence and who were incarcerated for at least one night during the study window (2002-2009). Longitudinal multivariable regression models were used to estimate the effect of MAT compared with other outpatient substance abuse treatments on inpatient mental health and substance abuse hospitalizations, emergency department visits, criminal convictions, and incarcerations.

RESULTS

MAT was associated with significant improvements in clinical outcomes in the 12 months following initiation compared with non-MAT comparison treatment, including greater reductions in mental health hospitalization and emergency department visits and greater improvements in psychotropic medication adherence. No benefits of MAT were found for most criminal justice outcomes, except for significant reductions in felony convictions among adults with bipolar disorder.

CONCLUSIONS

MAT is underused for treating alcohol dependence, especially among adults with serious mental illness. These results suggest that MAT can have important benefits for clinical outcomes in this population. More research is needed to improve its use in this patient population as well as to address barriers to its availability.

Psychiatric comorbidity in alcohol use disorders: results from the German S3 guidelines

Alcohol use disorders (AUD) have a high comorbidity with mental disorders. Vice versa, alcohol consumption plays an important role in affective disorders, anxiety disorders, ADHD, schizophrenic psychosis, and other mental disorders. In developing the current interdisciplinary, evidence-based treatment guideline on screening, diagnostics, and treatment of AUD, available research on comorbid mental diseases in AUD has been compiled to generate recommendations for treatment. The guideline was prepared under the responsibility of the German Association for Psychiatry, Psychotherapy, and Psychosomatics (DGPPN) and the German Association for Addiction Research and Therapy (DG-Sucht). To meet the methodological criteria for the highest quality guidelines ("S3-criteria") as defined by the Association of Scientific Medical Societies in Germany (AWMF), the following criteria were employed: (1) a systematic search, selection, and appraisal of the international literature; (2) a structured process to reach consensus; and (3) inclusion of all relevant representatives of future guideline users. After assessing and grading the available literature, the expert groups generated several recommendations for the screening, diagnosis, and treatment of comorbid mental disorders. These recommendations were subdivided into psycho-, pharmaco-, and combination therapies. These are the first guidelines ever to make specific treatment recommendations for comorbid mental diseases in AUD. The recommendations extend to different treatment approaches including diagnostics and settings to present available effective and state-of-the-art treatment approaches to clinicians. Hitherto, many clinical constellations have not been addressed in research. Therefore, recommendations for future research are specified.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) 2018 guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) previously published treatment guidelines for bipolar disorder in 2005, along with international commentaries and subsequent updates in 2007, 2009, and 2013. The last two updates were published in collaboration with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD). These 2018 CANMAT and ISBD Bipolar Treatment Guidelines represent the significant advances in the field since the last full edition was published in 2005, including updates to diagnosis and management as well as new research into pharmacological and psychological treatments. These advances have been translated into clear and easy to use recommendations for first, second, and third- line treatments, with consideration given to levels of evidence for efficacy, clinical support based on experience, and consensus ratings of safety, tolerability, and treatment-emergent switch risk. New to these guidelines, hierarchical rankings were created for first and second- line treatments recommended for acute mania, acute depression, and maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. Created by considering the impact of each treatment across all phases of illness, this hierarchy will further assist clinicians in making evidence-based treatment decisions. Lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, asenapine, aripiprazole, paliperidone, risperidone, and cariprazine alone or in combination are recommended as first-line treatments for acute mania. First-line options for bipolar I depression include quetiapine, lurasidone plus lithium or divalproex, lithium, lamotrigine, lurasidone, or adjunctive lamotrigine. While medications that have been shown to be effective for the acute phase should generally be continued for the maintenance phase in bipolar I disorder, there are some exceptions (such as with antidepressants); and available data suggest that lithium, quetiapine, divalproex, lamotrigine, asenapine, and aripiprazole monotherapy or combination treatments should be considered first-line for those initiating or switching treatment during the maintenance phase. In addition to addressing issues in bipolar I disorder, these guidelines also provide an overview of, and recommendations for, clinical management of bipolar II disorder, as well as advice on specific populations, such as women at various stages of the reproductive cycle, children and adolescents, and older adults. There are also discussions on the impact of specific psychiatric and medical comorbidities such as substance use, anxiety, and metabolic disorders. Finally, an overview of issues related to safety and monitoring is provided. The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope that these guidelines become a valuable tool for practitioners across the globe.

No differences in manic-like behaviors between voluntary ethanol and water drinking in Lateral Hypothalamic Kindled (LHK) alcohol preferring rats

This study investigates phenotypic differences of manic-like behaviors during voluntary ethanol (vs. water) intake in alcohol preferring (P) rats, using the lateral hypothalamus kindled (LHK) rat mania model. Alcohol preferring (P) rats exhibited classic manic-like behaviors during kindling and the post-kindling intervals in all coded behaviors (p < 0.0001), lending further validity to the lateral hypothalamus kindled rat as a useful model to study mania. However, there was no significant phenotypic difference between alcohol and water drinking alcohol preferring (P) rats.

Bipolar disorder and addictions: the elephant in the room

Addictions are highly prevalent in bipolar disorder and greatly affect clinical outcomes. In this editorial, we review the evidence that addictions are a key challenge in bipolar disorder, examine putative neurobiological mechanisms, and reflect on the limited clinical trial evidence base with suggestions for treatment strategies and further developments.

Pharmacological Treatment of Bipolar Disorder with Comorbid Alcohol Use Disorder

Bipolar disorder (BD) spectrum and alcohol use disorders (AUDs) commonly occur together. Comorbidity between the two conditions predisposes patients to elevated risks of adverse outcomes, including hospitalization and suicide, compared with either condition alone. Despite the consistent relationship observed between BD and AUD, the underlying cause remains incompletely characterized. Few trials conducted have been able to identify promising interventions for patients with these disease states. The antipsychotic quetiapine has been evaluated most commonly as a therapeutic agent for patients with BD and AUD followed by naltrexone and acamprosate. Randomized controlled trials of quetiapine have consistently reported a lack of efficacy for the treatment of patients with BD and AUD. Trials of acamprosate have also been negative but small in size. Results of the sole randomized controlled trial of naltrexone have found large treatment effect sizes, but no statistically significant difference between treatment groups. Other agents including the antipsychotic aripiprazole, mood stabilizing agents including lamotrigine, lithium, and divalproex, and the antiepileptic agent topiramate have also been evaluated for the treatment of BD and AUD with mixed findings. The lone statistically significant treatment effect was observed in a randomized, placebo-controlled trial of divalproex added on to lithium which demonstrated a reduction in alcohol use. This review summarizes the available clinical evidence and current guideline recommendations for the treatment of comorbid BD and AUD, and provides discussion and recommendations based on the current literature.

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

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to compare treatment response in bipolar I or II depression and generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) with and without recent alcohol and/or cannabis use disorder (ALC/CAN) to quetiapine-XR (extended release) or placebo.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, 8-week study of quetiapine-XR versus placebo in patients with bipolar I or II depression and GAD with or without a recent ALC/CAN was used to compare changes in Hamilton Depression Rating Scale-17, Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale, the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR-16), Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder-Severity (CGI-BP-S), and Timeline Follow Back within and between groups.

RESULTS

In the quetiapine-XR group, patients with a recent ALC/CAN (n = 22) had significant decreases in QIDS-SR-16 (-9.6 ± 1.6 vs. -3.7 ± 1.7) and CGI-BP-S (-1.6 ± 0.4 vs. -0.8 ± 0.03) than those without a recent ALC/CAN (n = 24). In the placebo group, both patients with a recent ALC/CAN (n = 23) and those without (n = 21) had similar reductions in these measures. The reduction of QIDS-SR-16 scores in patients with a recent ALC/CAN was also significantly different from that of their counterparts in the placebo group. Patients who received quetiapine-XR had larger decreases in the number of drinking days/week (p = 0.17) and number of cannabis joints/week (p = 0.09) compared to those who received placebo.

CONCLUSION

Quetiapine-XR was superior to placebo in reducing QIDS-SR-16 total score in patients with a recent ALC/CAN. Patients taking quetiapine-XR used less alcohol and cannabis than patients on placebo, suggesting that quetiapine-XR may be of use in patients with bipolar disorder accompanied by GAD and other comorbidities.

Unique prefrontal GABA and glutamate disturbances in co-occurring bipolar disorder and alcohol dependence

Bipolar disorder (BD) and alcohol dependence (AD) frequently co-occur, and co-occurring BD and AD are associated with devastating public health costs. Minimal neurobiological research exists to guide the development of effective treatments for this treatment-resistant population. We believe the present study represents the first investigation of prefrontal gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) and glutamate levels in co-occurring BD and current AD. The participants were 78 individuals who met DSM-IV criteria for BD I/II and current AD (n=20), BD I/II alone (n=19), current AD alone (n=20) or no diagnosis (n=19). The participants completed a baseline diagnostic visit, then returned approximately 4 days later for a two-dimensional J-resolved proton magnetic resonance spectroscopy (¹H-MRS) acquisition in dorsal anterior cingulate cortex (dACC). All participants were required to demonstrate ⩾1 week of abstinence from alcohol/drugs via serial biomarker testing before ¹H-MRS. A 2 × 2 factorial analysis of variance of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF)-corrected GABA/water concentrations demonstrated a significant BD × AD interaction (F=2.91, P<0.05), signifying uniquely low levels of GABA in BD+AD; this effect doubled when the sample was restricted to individuals who consumed alcohol within 2 weeks of ¹H-MRS. There were no overall effects of BD/AD on CSF-corrected glutamate/water levels. However, the BD × AD interaction, signifying uniquely low levels of glutamate in BD+AD, approached statistical significance (F=3.83, P=0.06) in individuals who consumed alcohol within 2 weeks of ¹H-MRS. The dACC GABA levels were significantly, negatively associated with Barratt Impulsiveness Scale (r=-0.28, P=0.02) and Obsessive Compulsive Drinking Scale (r=-0.35, P<0.01) scores. If replicated, these results may suggest that future treatment studies should preferentially evaluate therapeutics in BD+AD known to increase prefrontal GABA and glutamate levels.

Management of comorbid bipolar disorder and substance use disorders

BACKGROUND

The comorbidity of substance use disorders (SUDs) in bipolar disorder is among the highest in psychiatric disorders. Evidence-based controlled psychosocial or pharmacological interventions trials, which may guide treatment decisions, have not been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVE

To present a narrative review of the public health and clinical significance of this condition, including diagnostic and treatment implications, and to evaluate controlled trials conducted to date.

METHODS

Controlled trials reports in the English language were identified from multiple electronic databases and hand-searching bibliographies. We searched for treatment studies of bipolar disorder and comorbid SUDs (alcohol, cocaine, stimulants, opioid, tobacco, cannabis). Search period included all reports through September of 2016. We selected only randomized psychosocial studies or double-blind, placebo-controlled pharmacotherapy trials. We also reviewed reports of the public health and clinical significance and principle of managements of this condition.

RESULTS

We identified 16 treatment studies: 3 psychotherapy, and 13 pharmacotherapy trials. The following medications were evaluated: lithium carbonate, valproate, lamotrigine, topiramate, naltrexone, acamprosate, disulfiram, quetiapine, and citicoline. SUDs have substantial impact on the recognition and management of bipolar disorder. Integrated psychosocial interventions are helpful in decreasing substance abuse. Valproate and naltrexone may decrease alcohol use and citicoline may decrease cocaine use and enhance cognition.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a very limited number of pharmacotherapy and an even smaller number of psychosocial interventions. Our review highlights the need for more research in this area and for larger, multisite studies with generalizable samples to provide more definite guidance for clinical practice.

Depression and Bipolar Disorders in Patients With Alcohol Use Disorders

This review details methods for meeting the challenges of diagnosing and treating mood disorders that coexist with substance use disorders.

The International College of Neuro-Psychopharmacology (CINP) Treatment Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder in Adults (CINP-BD-2017), Part 2: Review, Grading of the Evidence, and a Precise Algorithm

Background

The current paper includes a systematic search of the literature, a detailed presentation of the results, and a grading of treatment options in terms of efficacy and tolerability/safety.

Material and Methods

The PRISMA method was used in the literature search with the combination of the words 'bipolar,' 'manic,' 'mania,' 'manic depression,' and 'manic depressive' with 'randomized,' and 'algorithms' with 'mania,' 'manic,' 'bipolar,' 'manic-depressive,' or 'manic depression.' Relevant web pages and review articles were also reviewed.

Results

The current report is based on the analysis of 57 guideline papers and 531 published papers related to RCTs, reviews, posthoc, or meta-analysis papers to March 25, 2016. The specific treatment options for acute mania, mixed episodes, acute bipolar depression, maintenance phase, psychotic and mixed features, anxiety, and rapid cycling were evaluated with regards to efficacy. Existing treatment guidelines were also reviewed. Finally, Tables reflecting efficacy and recommendation levels were created that led to the development of a precise algorithm that still has to prove its feasibility in everyday clinical practice.

Conclusions

A systematic literature search was conducted on the pharmacological treatment of bipolar disorder to identify all relevant random controlled trials pertaining to all aspects of bipolar disorder and graded the data according to a predetermined method to develop a precise treatment algorithm for management of various phases of bipolar disorder. It is important to note that the some of the recommendations in the treatment algorithm were based on the secondary outcome data from posthoc analyses.

Are Alcohol Anti-relapsing and Alcohol Withdrawal Drugs Useful in Cannabinoid Users?

Cannabinoids are still classified as illegal psychoactive drugs despite their broad and increasingly acknowledged therapeutic potential. These substances are most famous for their wide recreational use, particularly among young adults to either alter the state of consciousness, intensify pleasure induced by other psychoactive substances or as an alternative to the previously abused drugs. It is important to emphasize that cannabinoids are often taken together with a variety of medications intended for the treatment of alcohol use disorder (AUD) or alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS). These medications include disulfiram, acamprosate, and naltrexone. In this paper, we summarize recent advances in the knowledge of possible beneficial effects and interactions between cannabinoids and drugs commonly used for treatment of AUD and AWS either comorbid or existing as a separate disorder.

Assessment and treatment of mood disorders in the context of substance abuse

Recognition and management of mood symptoms in individuals using alcohol and/or other drugs represent a daily challenge for clinicians in both inpatient and outpatient treatment settings. Diagnosis of underlying mood disorders in the context of ongoing substance abuse requires careful collection of psychiatric history, and is often critical for optimal treatment planning and outcomes. Failure to recognize major depression or bipolar disorders in these patients can result in increased relapse rates, recurrence of mood episodes, and elevated risk of completed suicide. Over the past decade, epidemiologic research has clarified the prevalence of comorbid mood disorders in substance-dependent individuals, overturning previous assumptions that depression in these patients is simply an artifact of intoxication and/or withdrawal, therefore requiring no treatment. However, our understanding of the bidirectional relationships between mood and substance use disorders in terms of their course(s) of illness and prognoses remains limited. Like-wise, strikingly little treatment research exists to guide clinical decision making in co-occurring mood and substance use disorders, given their high prevalence and public health burden. Here we overview what is known and the salient gaps of knowledge where data might enhance diagnosis and treatment of these complicated patients.

Review of the efficacy of treatments for bipolar disorder and substance abuse

The aim of this study was to provide a descriptive overview of different psychological and pharmacological interventions used in the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder and substance abuse, in order to determine their efficacy. A review of the current literature was performed using the databases Medline and PsycINFO (2005-2015). A total of 30 experimental studies were grouped according to the type of therapeutic modality described (pharmacological 19; psychological 11). Quetiapine and valproate have demonstrated superiority on psychiatric symptoms and a reduction in alcohol consumption, respectively. Group psychological therapies with education, relapse prevention and family inclusion have also been shown to reduce the symptomatology and prevent alcohol consumption and dropouts. Although there seems to be some recommended interventions, the multicomponent base, the lack of information related to participants during treatment, experimental control or the number of dropouts of these studies suggest that it would be irresponsible to assume that there are well established treatments.

Alcohol and lithium have opposing effects on the period and phase of the behavioral free-running activity rhythm

Bipolar patients have a high prevalence of comorbid alcohol use and abuse disorders, while chronic alcohol drinking may increase the presence and severity of certain symptoms of bipolar disorder. As such, there may be many individuals that are prescribed lithium to alleviate the manic symptoms of bipolar disorder, but also drink alcohol concurrently. In addition, both alcoholics and individuals with bipolar disorder often exhibit disruptions to their sleep-wake cycles and other circadian rhythms. Interestingly, both ethanol and lithium are known to alter both the period and the phase of free-running rhythms in mammals. While lithium is known to lengthen the period, ethanol seems to shorten the period and attenuate the responses to acute light pulses. Therefore, the present study aimed to determine whether ethanol and lithium have opposing effects on the circadian pacemaker when administered together. C57BL/6J mice were provided drinking solutions containing lithium, alcohol, or both, and their free-running rhythms along with their response to photic phase shifts were investigated. Mice treated with lithium displayed period lengthening, which was almost completely negated when ethanol was added. Moreover, ethanol significantly attenuated light-induced phase delays while the addition of lithium partially restored this response. These results indicate that alcohol and lithium have opposing effects on behavioral circadian rhythms. Individuals with bipolar disorder who are prescribed lithium and who drink alcohol might be inadvertently altering their sleep and circadian cycles, which may exacerbate their symptoms.

Attempted suicide in people with co-occurring bipolar and substance use disorders: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both individuals with bipolar (BD) and those with alcohol (AUD) and other substance (SUD) use disorders are likely to attempt suicide. Comorbidity of BD and AUD/SUD may increase the likelihood of suicide attempts. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the association of comorbid AUD/SUD and suicide attempts in subjects with BD in the literature to date.

METHODS

Electronic databases through January 2013 were searched. Studies reporting rates of suicide attempts in people with co-occurring BD and AUD/SUD were retrieved. Comorbid AUD and SUD and suicide attempts rates as well as demographic, clinical, and methodological variables were extracted from each publication or obtained directly from its authors.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine of 222 studies assessed for eligibility met the inclusion criteria, comprising a total of 31,294 individuals with BD, of whom 6308 (20.1%) had documented suicide attempts. There were consistent findings across the studies included. As compared to controls, subjects with BD and comorbid AUD/SUD were more likely to attempt suicide. The cross-sectional association estimates showed random-effects pooled crude ORs of 1.96 (95% CI=1.56-2.47; p<0.01), 1.72 (95% CI=1.52-1.95; p<0.01), and 1.77 (95% CI=1.49-2.10; p<0.01), for combined AUD/SUD, AUD, and SUD. There was no publication bias and sensitivity analyses based on the highest quality studies confirmed core results.

LIMITATIONS

The effects of the number and the type of suicide attempts could not be investigated due to insufficient information.

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbid AUD and SUD in individuals with BD are significantly associated with suicide attempts. Individuals with this comorbidity should be targeted for intensive suicide prevention efforts.

Bipolar disorder and gambling disorder comorbidity: current evidence and implications for pharmacological treatment

BACKGROUND

The co-occurrence of bipolar disorder (BD) and gambling disorder (GD), though of clinical and public health importance, is still scarcely investigated. Comorbid BD-GD subjects experience a more severe course of illness and poorer treatment outcome, due to a range of clinical and psychosocial factors that collectively impede remission and recovery. The aim of our paper is to review the role of pharmacotherapy in the treatment of comorbid BD-GD, in order to support clinical decisions according to the best available evidence.

METHODS

A qualitative systematic review of studies on pharmacological treatment in comorbid BD-GD was performed. A comprehensive literature search of online databases, bibliographies of published articles and gray literature was conducted. Data on efficacy, safety and tolerability were extracted and levels of evidence were assessed. We also provide a brief overview of current epidemiological, neurobiological and clinical findings, with the intention of proposing a dimensional approach to the choice of available drugs.

RESULTS

The only drug with a high level of evidence is lithium. Considering the inclusion of GD in DSM-5 'Substance-related and Addictive Disorders' category, we discuss the use of other drugs with a high level of evidence currently used in BD subjects with co-occurring substance use disorders.

LIMITATIONS

Only few clinical trials are available and the population is limited; therefore no conclusive evidence can be inferred.

CONCLUSIONS

Further randomized controlled trials are required to evaluate the efficacy of pharmacological treatment strategies in large samples of patients with comorbid BD-GD. Also, attempts should be made to identify other shared clinical and psychopathological domains that are amenable to treatment.

Randomized controlled trial of a mobile phone intervention for improving adherence to naltrexone for alcohol use disorders

Background

Naltrexone is a front-line treatment for alcohol use disorders, but its efficacy is limited by poor medication adherence. This randomized controlled trial evaluated whether a mobile health intervention could improve naltrexone adherence.

Methods

Treatment-seeking participants with an alcohol use disorder (N = 76) were randomized to intervention and control conditions. All participants received naltrexone (50 mg/day) with a medication event monitoring system (MEMS) and a prepaid smartphone, and received a daily text message querying medication side effects, alcohol use, and craving. Those in the intervention arm received additional medication reminders and adherence assessment via text message.

Results

The primary outcome, proportion of participants with adequate adherence (defined as ≥80% of prescribed doses taken through Week 8), did not differ between groups in intent-to-treat analyses (p = .34). Mean adherence at study midpoint (Week 4) was 83% in the intervention condition and 77% in the control condition (p = .35). Survival analysis found that the intervention group sustained adequate adherence significantly longer (M = 19 days [95% CI = 0.0–44.0]) than those in the control group (M = 3 days [95% CI = 0.0–8.1]) during the first month of treatment (p = .04). Medication adherence did not predict drinking outcomes.

Conclusions

These results suggest that in the context of daily monitoring and assessment via cell phone, additional text message reminders do not further improve medication adherence. Although this initial trial does not provide support for the efficacy of text messaging to improve adherence to pharmacotherapy for alcohol use disorders, additional trials with larger samples and alternate designs are warranted.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01349985

A review of treatment options for co-occurring methamphetamine use disorders and depression

Co-occurring methamphetamine use and depression interferes with treatment outcomes. Female methamphetamine users are known to have higher rates of depression than male methamphetamine users, although this is also true for the general population. There are limited treatment options for the management of depression among methamphetamine users. In this integrative review, we summarize data on treatment strategies for co-occurring depression and methamphetamine use disorders. English-language articles were identified from PsychINFO, CINAHL, PubMed, and Medline as well as from reference lists of key articles. Search terms included "methamphetamine," "depression," and "treatment." Research articles describing psychological (n = 3), pharmacological (n = 6), nutritional supplement (n = 1), and psychological combined with pharmacological (n = 3) approaches for the treatment of methamphetamine use or withdrawal and/or depression are included in this review. Psychological and combination of psychological with pharmacological approaches have not been shown to be effective in treating these co-occurring conditions. Antidepressants have been determined to be ineffective and/or to introduce side effects. Gender differences with response to treatment were examined in only one of the published studies. There is a large gap in knowledge regarding treatment of co-occurring methamphetamine use disorders and depression. Considering that female methamphetamine users experience higher rates of depression than men, a focus on gender-specific treatment approaches is warranted.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of quetiapine in patients with bipolar disorder, mixed or depressed phase, and alcohol dependence

BACKGROUND

Alcohol dependence is common in bipolar disorder (BPD) and associated with treatment nonadherence, violence, and hospitalization. Quetiapine is a standard treatment for BPD. We previously reported improvement in depressive symptoms, but not alcohol use, with quetiapine in BPD and alcohol dependence. However, mean alcohol use was low and a larger effect size on alcohol-related measures was observed in those with higher levels of alcohol consumption. In this study, efficacy of quetiapine in patients with BPD and alcohol dependence was examined in patients with higher mean baseline alcohol use than in the prior study.

METHODS

Ninety outpatients with bipolar I or II disorders, depressed or mixed mood state, and current alcohol dependence were randomized to 12 weeks of sustained release quetiapine (to 600 mg/d) add-on therapy or placebo. Drinking was quantified using the Timeline Follow Back method. Additional assessment tools included the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression, Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report, Young Mania Rating Scale, Penn Alcohol Craving Scale, liver enzymes, and side effects. Alcohol use and mood were analyzed using a declining-effects random-regression model.

RESULTS

Baseline and demographic characteristics in the 2 groups were similar. No significant between-group differences were observed on the primary outcome measure of drinks per day or other alcohol-related or mood measures (p > 0.05). Overall side effect burden, glucose, and cholesterol were similar in the 2 groups. However, a significant weight increase was observed with quetiapine at week 6 (+2.9 lbs [SE 1.4] quetiapine vs. -2.0 lbs [SE 1.4], p = 0.03), but not at week 12. Scores on the Barnes Akathisia Scale increased significantly more (p = 0.04) with quetiapine (+0.40 [SE 0.3]) than placebo (-0.52 [SE 0.3]) at week 6 but not week 12. Retention (survival) in the study was similar in the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings suggest that quetiapine does not reduce alcohol consumption in patients with BPD and alcohol dependence.

Pharmacologic treatment of alcoholism

Progress in understanding the neuroscience of addiction has significantly advanced the development of more efficacious medications for the treatment of alcohol use disorders (AUD). While several medications have been approved by regulatory bodies around the world for the treatment of AUD, they are not universally efficacious. Recent research has yielded improved understanding of the genetics and brain circuits that underlie alcohol reward and its habitual use. This research has contributed to pharmacogenetic studies of medication response, and will ultimately lead to a more "personalized medicine" approach to AUD pharmacotherapy. This chapter summarizes work on clinically available medications (both approved by regulatory bodies and investigational) for the treatment of alcohol dependence, as well as the psychiatric disorders that are commonly comorbid with AUD. Studies that have evaluated genetic influences on medication response and those that have employed neuroimaging to probe mechanisms of medication action or response are highlighted. Finally, new targets discovered in animal models for possible pharmacologic intervention in humans are overviewed and future directions in medications development provided.

Phentermine, sibutramine and affective disorders

A safe and effective way to control weight in patients with affective disorders is needed, and phentermine is a possible candidate. We performed a PubMed search of articles pertaining to phentermine, sibutramine, and affective disorders. We compared the studies of phentermine with those of sibutramine. The search yielded a small number of reports. Reports concerning phentermine and affective disorders reported that i) its potency in the central nervous system may be comparatively low, and ii) it may induce depression in some patients. We were unable to find more studies on the subject; thus, it is unclear presently whether phentermine use is safe in affective disorder patients. Reports regarding the association of sibutramine and affective disorders were slightly more abundant. A recent study that suggested that sibutramine may have deleterious effects in patients with a psychiatric history may provide a clue for future phentermine research. Three explanations are possible concerning the association between phentermine and affective disorders: i) phentermine, like sibutramine, may have a depression-inducing effect that affects a specific subgroup of patients, ii) phentermine may have a dose-dependent depression-inducing effect, or iii) phentermine may simply not be associated with depression. Large-scale studies with affective disorder patients focusing on these questions are needed to clarify this matter before investigation of its efficacy may be carried out and it can be used in patients with affective disorders.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2013

The Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments published guidelines for the management of bipolar disorder in 2005, with updates in 2007 and 2009. This third update, in conjunction with the International Society for Bipolar Disorders, reviews new evidence and is designed to be used in conjunction with the previous publications.The recommendations for the management of acute mania remain largely unchanged. Lithium, valproate, and several atypical antipsychotic agents continue to be first-line treatments for acute mania. Monotherapy with asenapine, paliperidone extended release (ER), and divalproex ER, as well as adjunctive asenapine, have been added as first-line options.For the management of bipolar depression, lithium, lamotrigine, and quetiapine monotherapy, as well as olanzapine plus selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI), and lithium or divalproex plus SSRI/bupropion remain first-line options. Lurasidone monotherapy and the combination of lurasidone or lamotrigine plus lithium or divalproex have been added as a second-line options. Ziprasidone alone or as adjunctive therapy, and adjunctive levetiracetam have been added as not-recommended options for the treatment of bipolar depression. Lithium, lamotrigine, valproate, olanzapine, quetiapine, aripiprazole, risperidone long-acting injection, and adjunctive ziprasidone continue to be first-line options for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder. Asenapine alone or as adjunctive therapy have been added as third-line options.

Meta-analysis of naltrexone and acamprosate for treating alcohol use disorders: when are these medications most helpful?

AIMS

Although debates over the efficacy of oral naltrexone and acamprosate in treating alcohol use disorders tend to focus on their global efficacy relative to placebo or their efficacy relative to each other, the underlying reality may be more nuanced. This meta-analysis examined when naltrexone and acamprosate are most helpful by testing: (i) the relative efficacy of each medication given its presumed mechanism of action (reducing heavy drinking versus fostering abstinence) and (ii) whether different ways of implementing each medication (required abstinence before treatment, detoxification before treatment, goal of treatment, length of treatment, dosage) moderate its effects.

METHODS

A systematic literature search identified 64 randomized, placebo-controlled, English-language clinical trials completed between 1970 and 2009 focused on acamprosate or naltrexone.

RESULTS

Acamprosate had a significantly larger effect size than naltrexone on the maintenance of abstinence, and naltrexone had a larger effect size than acamprosate on the reduction of heavy drinking and craving. For naltrexone, requiring abstinence before the trial was associated with larger effect sizes for abstinence maintenance and reduced heavy drinking compared with placebo. For acamprosate, detoxification before medication administration was associated with better abstinence outcomes compared with placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

In treatment for alcohol use disorders, acamprosate has been found to be slightly more efficacious in promoting abstinence and naltrexone slightly more efficacious in reducing heavy drinking and craving. Detoxification before treatment or a longer period of required abstinence before treatment is associated with larger medication effects for acamprosate and naltrexone respectively.

Current status of co-occurring mood and substance use disorders: a new therapeutic target

Mood and substance use disorders commonly co-occur, yet there is little evidence-based research to guide the pharmacologic management of these comorbid disorders. The authors review the existing empirical findings, some of which may call into question current clinical pharmacotherapy practices for treating co-occurring mood and substance use disorders. The authors also highlight knowledge gaps that can serve as a basis for future research. The specific mood disorders reviewed are bipolar and major depressive disorders (either one co-occurring with a substance use disorder). Overall, findings from the relatively small amount of available data indicate that pharmacotherapy for managing mood symptoms can be effective in patients with substance dependence, although results have not been consistent across all studies. Also, in most studies, medications for managing mood symptoms did not appear to have an impact on the substance use disorder. In a recent trial for comorbid major depression and alcohol dependence, combination treatment with a medication for depression and another for alcohol dependence was found to reduce depressive symptoms and excessive drinking simultaneously. However, research has only begun to address optimal pharmacologic management of co-occurring disorders. In addition, current clinical treatment for alcohol and drug dependence often excludes new pharmacotherapies approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for treating certain types of addiction. With new data becoming available, it appears that we need to revisit current practice in the pharmacological management of co-occurring mood and substance use disorders.

Bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder: a review

Bipolar disorder and alcohol use disorder represent a significant comorbid population, which is significantly worse than either diagnosis alone in presentation, duration, co-morbidity, cost, suicide rate, and poor response to treatment. They share some common characteristics in relation to genetic background, neuroimaging findings, and some biochemical findings. They can be treated with separate care, or ideally some form of integrated care. There are a number of pharmacotherapy trials, and psychotherapy trials that can aid program development. Post-treatment prognosis can be influenced by a number of factors including early abstinence, baseline low anxiety, engagement with an aftercare program and female gender. The future development of novel therapies relies upon increased psychiatric and medical awareness of the co-morbidity, and further research into novel therapies for the comorbid group.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, trial of lamotrigine therapy in bipolar disorder, depressed or mixed phase and cocaine dependence

Bipolar disorder is associated with very high rates of substance dependence. Cocaine use is particularly common. However, limited data are available on the treatment of this population. A 10-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of lamotrigine was conducted in 120 outpatients with bipolar disorder, depressed or mixed mood state, and cocaine dependence. Other substance use was not exclusionary. Cocaine use was quantified weekly by urine drug screens and participant report using the timeline follow-back method. Mood was assessed with the Hamilton rating scale for depression, quick inventory of depressive symptomatology self-report, and young mania rating scale. Cocaine craving was assessed with the cocaine-craving questionnaire. Data were analyzed using a random regression analysis that used all available data from participants with at least one postbaseline assessment (n=112). Lamotrigine and placebo groups were similar demographically (age 45.1±7.3 vs 43.5±10.0 years, 41.8% vs 38.6% women). Urine drug screens (primary outcome measure) and mood symptoms were not significantly different between groups. However, dollars spent on cocaine showed a significant initial (baseline to week 1, p=0.01) and by-week (weeks 1-10, p=0.05) decrease in dollars spent on cocaine, favoring lamotrigine. Few positive trials of medications for cocaine use, other than stimulant replacement, have been reported, and none have been reported for bipolar disorder. Reduction in amount of cocaine use by self-report with lamotrigine suggests that a standard treatment for bipolar disorder may reduce cocaine use. A study limitation was weekly assessment of urine drug screens that decreased the ability to detect between-group differences.

BAP updated guidelines: evidence-based guidelines for the pharmacological management of substance abuse, harmful use, addiction and comorbidity: recommendations from BAP

The British Association for Psychopharmacology guidelines for the treatment of substance abuse, harmful use, addiction and comorbidity with psychiatric disorders primarily focus on their pharmacological management. They are based explicitly on the available evidence and presented as recommendations to aid clinical decision making for practitioners alongside a detailed review of the evidence. A consensus meeting, involving experts in the treatment of these disorders, reviewed key areas and considered the strength of the evidence and clinical implications. The guidelines were drawn up after feedback from participants. The guidelines primarily cover the pharmacological management of withdrawal, short- and long-term substitution, maintenance of abstinence and prevention of complications, where appropriate, for substance abuse or harmful use or addiction as well management in pregnancy, comorbidity with psychiatric disorders and in younger and older people.

Efficacy of pharmacotherapy in bipolar disorder: a report by the WPA section on pharmacopsychiatry

The current statement is a systematic review of the available data concerning the efficacy of medication treatment of bipolar disorder (BP). A systematic MEDLINE search was made concerning the treatment of BP (RCTs) with the names of treatment options as keywords. The search was updated on 10 March 2012. The literature suggests that lithium, first and second generation antipsychotics and valproate and carbamazepine are efficacious in the treatment of acute mania. Quetiapine and the olanzapine-fluoxetine combination are also efficacious for treating bipolar depression. Antidepressants should only be used in combination with an antimanic agent, because they can induce switching to mania/hypomania/mixed states/rapid cycling when utilized as monotherapy. Lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine and aripiprazole are efficacious during the maintenance phase. Lamotrigine is efficacious in the prevention of depression, and it remains to be clarified whether it is also efficacious for mania. There is some evidence on the efficacy of psychosocial interventions as an adjunctive treatment to medication. Electroconvulsive therapy is an option for refractory patients. In acute manic patients who are partial responders to lithium/valproate/carbamazepine, adding an antipsychotic is a reasonable choice. The combination with best data in acute bipolar depression is lithium plus lamotrigine. Patients stabilized on combination treatment might do worse if shifted to monotherapy during maintenance, and patients could benefit with add-on treatment with olanzapine, valproate, an antidepressant, or lamotrigine, depending on the index acute phase. A variety of treatment options for BP are available today, but still unmet needs are huge. Combination therapy may improve the treatment outcome but it also carries more side-effect burden. Further research is necessary as well as the development of better guidelines and algorithms for the step-by-step rational treatment.

Pharmacotherapy of alcohol use disorders and concurrent psychiatric disorders: a review

Alcohol use disorders (AUDs) are among the most prevalent psychiatric disorders. Epidemiologic studies have shown a high prevalence of concurrent psychiatric disorders among people with AUDs as well as a higher prevalence of AUDs in people with psychiatric disorders than in the general population. Though psychiatric patients with concurrent AUDs are at increased risk for morbidity and mortality, they are commonly undertreated for their alcohol-related disorders. The efficacy of pharmacotherapy for AUDs is well documented. Our paper reviews the common pharmacotherapies available for AUDs and focuses on the available research regarding treatment of AUDs among psychiatric populations with mood, anxiety, and psychotic disorders. Despite the high prevalence of concurrent AUDs and psychiatric disorders, very limited information has been collected using a randomized controlled trial design targeting those concurrent conditions. Several prevalent psychiatric disorders have not been studied when co-occurring with AUDs. Further research of pharmacological treatments for concurrent AUDs and psychiatric diagnoses is urgently needed.