A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Citicoline for Cocaine Dependence in Bipolar I Disorder

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.

Pharmacological Treatments for Cocaine Craving: What Is the Way Forward? A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

cocaine craving is a core feature of cocaine use disorder and remains a critical challenge for abstinence and relapse prevention. This review summarizes the anti-craving efficacy of pharmacotherapies tested for cocaine use disorder, in the context of randomized-controlled clinical trials.

OBJECTIVES

we assessed the databases of the U.S. National Library of Medicine, Google Scholar, and PsycINFO, without date restrictions up to August 2022, to identify relevant studies.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTIONS

we included double-blinded randomized-controlled trials investigating pharmacotherapies for cocaine craving and/or cocaine use disorder whose outcomes included cocaine craving.

STUDY APPRAISAL AND SYNTHESIS METHODS

Two authors screened studies' titles and abstracts for inclusion, and both read all the included studies. We systematically gathered information on the following aspects of each study: title; author(s); year of publication; sample size; mean age; sample characteristics; study set-ting; whether participants were treatment-seeking; study design; craving measures; study interventions; drop-out rates; and other relevant outcomes.

RESULTS

Overall, we appraised 130 clinical trials, including 8137 participants. We further considered the drugs from the studies that scored equal to or greater than six points in the quality assessment. There was a correlation between craving and cocaine use outcomes (self-reports, timeline follow-back or urinary benzoylecgonine) in the vast majority of studies. In the short-term treatment, acute phenylalanine-tyrosine depletion, clonidine, fenfluramine, meta-chlorophenylpiperazine (m-CPP) and mecamylamine presented promising effects. In the long term, amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone presented promising anti-craving effects. Unfortunately, the highly tested medications were not successful in most of the trials, as follows: propranolol in the short term; amantadine, aripiprazole, bromocriptine, citicoline, ketamine, modafinil, olanzapine, topiramate in the long term. The remaining 52 medications had no positive anti-craving outcomes.

LIMITATIONS

Our review was limited by high heterogeneity of craving assessments across the studies and by a great range of pharmacotherapies. Further, the majority of the studies considered abstinence and retention in treatment as the main outcomes, whereas craving was a secondary outcome and some of the studies evaluated patients with cocaine use disorder with comorbidities such as opioid or alcohol use disorder, schizophrenia, bipolar disorder or attention deficit hyperactivity. Lastly, most of the studies also included non-pharmacological treatments, such as counseling or psychotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a direct association between craving and cocaine use, underscoring craving as an important treatment target for promoting abstinence among persons with cocaine use disorder. Clonidine, fenfluramine and m-CPP showed to be promising medications for cocaine craving in the short-term treatment, and amphetamine, biperiden, carbamazepine, lisdexamfetamine, lorcaserin, methamphetamine, mirtazapine, pioglitazone, progesterone, guanfacine, levodopa, nefazodone in the long-term treatment.

Off-label and investigational drugs in the treatment of alcohol use disorder: A critical review

Compounds known to be successful in the treatment of alcohol use disorder include the aversive agent, Disulfiram, the glutamatergic NMDA receptor antagonist, Acamprosate, and the opioid receptor antagonists, Naltrexone and Nalmefene. Although all four are effective in maintaining abstinence or reduction of alcohol consumption, only a small percentage of patients receive pharmacological treatment. In addition, many other medications have been investigated for their therapeutic potential in the treatment of alcohol use disorder. In this review we summarize and compare Baclofen, Gabapentin, Topiramate, Ondansetron, Varenicline, Aripiprazole, Quetiapine, Clozapine, Antidepressants, Lithium, Neuropeptide Y, Neuropeptide S, Corticotropin-releasing factor antagonists, Oxytocin, PF-05190457, Memantine, Ifenprodil, Samidorphan, Ondelopran, ABT-436, SSR149415, Mifepristone, Ibudilast, Citicoline, Rimonabant, Surinabant, AM4113 and Gamma-hydroxybutyrate While some have shown promising results in the treatment of alcohol use disorder, others have disappointed and should be excluded from further investigation. Here we discuss the most promising results and highlight medications that deserve further preclinical or clinical study. Effective, patient-tailored treatment will require greater understanding provided by many more preclinical and clinical studies.

Bipolar Disorder and Comorbid Use of Illicit Substances

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

Comparison of Treatments for Cocaine Use Disorder Among Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

IMPORTANCE

In the US and the United Kingdom, cocaine use is the second leading cause of illicit drug overdose death. Psychosocial treatments for cocaine use disorder are limited, and no pharmacotherapy is approved for use in the US or Europe.

OBJECTIVE

To compare treatments for active cocaine use among adults.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched for clinical trials published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION

This meta-analysis was registered on Covidence.org (study 8731) on December 31, 2015. Clinical trials were included if they (1) had the term cocaine in the article title; (2) were published between December 31, 1995, and December 31, 2017; (3) were written in English; (4) enrolled outpatients 18 years or older with active cocaine use at baseline; and (5) reported treatment group size, treatment duration, retention rates, and urinalysis results for the presence of cocaine metabolites. A study was excluded if (1) more than 25% of participants were not active cocaine users or more than 80% of participants had negative test results for the presence of cocaine metabolites at baseline and (2) it reported only pooled urinalysis results indicating the presence of multiple substances and did not report the specific proportion of positive test results for cocaine metabolites. Multiple reviewers reached criteria consensus. Of 831 records screened, 157 studies (18.9%) met selection criteria and were included in the analysis.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guideline. Search results were imported from PubMed XML into Covidence.org then Microsoft Excel. Data extraction was completed in 2 iterations to ensure fidelity. Analyses included a multilevel random-effects model, a multilevel mixed-effects meta-regression model, and sensitivity analyses. Treatments were clustered into 11 categories (psychotherapy, contingency management programs, placebo, opioids, psychostimulants, anticonvulsants, dopamine agonists, antidepressants, antipsychotics, miscellaneous medications, and other therapies). Missing data were imputed using multiple imputation by chained equations. The significance threshold for all analyses was P = .05. Data were analyzed using the metafor and mice packages in R software, version 3.3.2 (R Foundation for Statistical Computing). Data were analyzed from January 1, 2018, to February 28, 2021.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was the intention-to-treat logarithm of the odds ratio (OR) of having a negative urinalysis result for the presence of cocaine metabolites at the end of each treatment period compared with baseline. The hypothesis, which was formulated after data collection, was that no treatment category would have a significant association with objective reductions in cocaine use.

RESULTS

A total of 157 studies comprising 402 treatment groups and 15 842 participants were included. Excluding other therapies, the largest treatment groups across all studies were psychotherapy (mean [SD] number of participants, 40.04 [36.88]) and contingency management programs (mean [SD] number of participants, 37.51 [25.51]). Only contingency management programs were significantly associated with an increased likelihood of having a negative test result for the presence of cocaine (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.62-2.80), and this association remained significant in all sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this meta-analysis, contingency management programs were associated with reductions in cocaine use among adults. Research efforts and policies that align with this treatment modality may benefit those who actively use cocaine and attenuate societal burdens.

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.

Cognitive impairment in individuals with bipolar disorder with and without comorbid alcohol and/or cocaine use disorders

BACKGROUND

Bipolar disorder (BD) frequently co-occurs with substance use disorders (SUDs), and both are associated with cognitive impairment. This study compares cognition between individuals with BD with and without current alcohol use disorder (AUD), cocaine use disorder (CUD), or both, as these disorders may be linked with additive cognitive impairment.

METHODS

Baseline data were analyzed from five clinical studies of individuals with the aforementioned disorders (N = 373). Participants were grouped as follows: BD-only, BD + AUD, BD + CUD, or BD + AUD + CUD. Cognition was assessed with the Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test (RAVLT) (verbal learning and memory) and Stroop Color Word Test (executive function). Multiple linear regression models determined if SUD diagnosis, among other demographic and clinical variables, predicted each cognitive test's T-score. Regression equations were used to compute each group's mean T-scores.

RESULTS

All groups demonstrated below-average mean T-scores on all tests, with no significant between-group score differences. RAVLT total T-scores were lower than Stroop color-word T-scores within all groups (non-overlapping 95% confidence intervals). Higher daily cocaine use predicted higher Stroop T-scores (p < 0.01) and RAVLT delayed recall T-scores (p < 0.05). No other non-demographic variable, including AUD/CUD group status, predicted cognitive performance.

LIMITATIONS

A full cognitive battery and some relevant variables (e.g. BD lifetime illness course) were not available. Many participants (42.1%) had additional SUDs.

CONCLUSIONS

BD with and without AUD/CUD was found to be associated with greater deficits in verbal learning and memory than in executive function. Addressing these impaired domains in dually-diagnosed patients may improve treatment and functional outcomes.

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.

Anticraving therapy for alcohol use disorder: A clinical review

Aim

In this review, the author focused on anticraving therapy for alcohol use disorder (AUD) defined by DMS‐5. A comprehensive review was carried out on the available published papers on anticraving drugs for treating AUD patients.

Methods

The author described all drugs with anticraving benefits for treating AUD patients approved by the Food and Drug Administration of the United States (US FDA) and European Medicines Agency of the European Union. Then, the commonly prescribed anticraving drugs and those under development were also described.

Results

The US FDA‐approved anticraving drugs included acamprosate and naltrexone, and those approved by European Medicines Agency were gamma‐hydroxybutyrate and nalmefene. The author also highlighted topiramate, gabapentin, ondansetron, LY196044, ifenprodil, varenicline, ABT‐436, mifepristone, citicoline, and baclofen. The putative mechanisms of action of and the use in clinical practice of those anticraving drugs were also described.

Conclusion

Although slowly developing, the field of anticraving drugs is getting into shape as a promising entity of a pharmaceutical class of drugs. Then, the author addressed on the underused issues of those recommended, and suggested anticraving drugs by the practice guideline of the American Psychiatric Association. The author urges that clinicians should be more “adventurous” in prescribing those promising drugs because benefits of those anticraving drugs are far‐outweighing the possible side effects of anticraving drugs, or the harms of untreated AUD itself.

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

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

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

RECENT FINDINGS

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

SUMMARY

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

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial of Citicoline in Patients with Alcohol Use Disorder

BACKGROUND

Alcohol use disorder is a major societal and individual burden that exacerbates health outcomes, decreases quality of life, and negatively affects U.S. healthcare spending. Although pharmacological treatments are available for alcohol use disorder, many of them are limited by small effect sizes and used infrequently. Citicoline is a widely available over-the-counter supplement with a favorable side effect profile. It acts through cholinergic pathways and phospholipid metabolism. The current report examines the effect of oral citicoline on alcohol use, craving, depressive symptoms, and cognitive outcomes in individuals with alcohol use disorder.

METHODS

A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled, pilot study of citicoline (titrated to 2,000 mg/d) in 62 adults (age 18 to 75) with alcohol use disorder was conducted. Alcohol use, such as number of drinking days, amount used, and number of heavy drinking days, was assessed using the Timeline Followback method and liver enzymes, while alcohol craving was measured using the Penn Alcohol Craving Scale. A neurocognitive battery (e.g., Rey Auditory Verbal Learning Test) and depressive symptoms scale (e.g., Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology Self-Report) scores were also collected. Data were analyzed using a random regression analysis.

RESULTS

The primary outcome analysis was conducted in the intent-to-treat sample and consisted of 55 participants (78.2% men and 21.8% women, mean age of 46.47 ± 9.15 years). In the assessment period, the drinking days, on average, represented 77% of the assessed days. Significant between-group differences were not observed on alcohol use, craving, and cognitive or depressive symptom measures. Citicoline was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

This proof-of-concept study observed that citicoline was well tolerated, but was not associated with a reduction in alcohol use or other outcomes, as compared to placebo. The favorable effects reported with citicoline for cocaine use, cognitive disorders, and other conditions do not appear to extend to alcohol use disorder.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Citicoline Combination Therapy for Major Depressive Disorder: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

Residual symptoms of major depressive disorder are a source of long-term morbidity. New therapeutic strategies are required to alleviate this morbidity and enhance patient quality of life. Citicoline has been used for vascular accidents and has been effective in cognitive rehabilitation. It has been used successfully to reduce craving in patients with substance abuse disorder and for mood management of bipolar disorder. Here, we test citicoline effectiveness as an adjuvant therapy in major depression.

METHOD

A double-blind randomized trial was designed on 50 patients with major depressive disorder who were under treatment with citalopram. Patients were allocated to 2 groups and received citicoline (100 mg twice a day) or placebo as an adjuvant treatment for 6 weeks. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) at baseline and at weeks 2, 4, and 6.

RESULTS

Significantly greater improvement was observed in the HDRS scores of the citicoline group compared with the placebo group from baseline to weeks 2, 4, and 6 (Ps = 0.030, 0.032, and 0.021, respectively). Repeated-measures general linear model demonstrated a significant effect for time × treatment interaction on the HDRS score (F2.10,101.22 = 3.12, P = 0.04). Remission rate was significantly higher in the citicoline group compared with the placebo group (P = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Citicoline was an effective adjuvant to citalopram in the therapy of major depressive disorder.