Pharmacotherapy of bipolar disorder in children and adolescents: an update

Symptoms and Characteristics of Youth Hospitalized for Depression: Subthreshold Manic Symptoms Can Help Differentiate Bipolar from Unipolar Depression

Background: Most people who have major depressive disorder (MDD) or bipolar disorder (BD) will have their first episode of depression in adolescence. However, in the absence of significant [hypo]manic symptoms, there are no clear guidelines for distinguishing bipolar from unipolar depression, which can lead to misdiagnosis and ineffective/harmful treatment. We aimed to compare phenomenological differences among youth with MDD or BD hospitalized for an acute episode of depression. Methods: A retrospective electronic chart review of adolescents hospitalized in an acute care inpatient unit who had a discharge diagnosis of MDD, MDD with mixed or psychotic features (MDD+), BD-I-current episode depressed, or BD-II-current episode depressed, was performed. Results: Altogether, 598 patients (mean age = 15.1 ± 1.5 years, female = 71%, and White = 46%) met study inclusion criteria, i.e., BD-I: n = 39, BD-II: n = 84, MDD: n = 422, and MDD+: n = 53 patients. The admission Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD) total score was significantly higher in the BD-I (29.3 ± 9.1) and MDD+ (31.2 ± 9.3) groups versus the MDD group (24.3 ± 9.7) (p < 0.05). Although there were some group differences in the severity of individual depression symptoms, these did not line up neatly across BD and MDD groups. At admission, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total scores were significantly higher in the BD-I (14.4 ± 7.4), BD-II (13.8 ± 6.5), and MDD+ groups (14.3 ± 6.6) versus the MDD group (8.2 ± 4.6, p < 0.05). Additionally, 9 of 11 and 4 of 11 YMRS items scored significantly higher in the BD-II and BD-I groups versus the MDD group, respectively. The motor activity and hypersexuality items, in particular, were scored consistently higher in the BD groups than MDD groups. Limitations: All diagnoses were made based on a clinical interview and not a structured diagnostic interview, and some of the subgroup sample sizes were relatively modest, limiting the power for group comparisons. Conclusion: The presence of subsyndromal manic symptoms during an episode of MDD currently offers the clearest way by which to differentiate bipolar depression from unipolar depression.

A Randomized, Double-Blind, Controlled Trial of Lithium Versus Quetiapine for the Treatment of Acute Mania in Youth with Early Course Bipolar Disorder

Objective: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of manic or mixed episodes in youths with early course bipolar I disorder. Methods: Six-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of adolescents with acute manic/mixed episode. Target dose of quetiapine dose was adjusted to a target dose of 400-600 mg and target serum level for lithium was 1.0-1.2 mEq/L. Primary outcome measure was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Secondary outcomes were treatment response (50% or more decrease from baseline in YMRS score) and remission (YMRS score ≤12, Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R] total score ≤28 and Clinical Global Impression Bipolar Severity Scale [CGI-BP-S] overall score of ≤3, respectively). Results: A total of 109 patients were randomized (quetiapine = 58 and lithium = 51). Participants in the quetiapine treatment group showed a significantly greater reduction in YMRS score than those in the lithium group (-11.0 vs. -13.2; p < 0.001; effect size 0.39). Response rate was 72% in the quetiapine group and 49% in the lithium group (p = 0.012); no differences in remission rates between groups were observed. Most frequent side effects for lithium were headaches (60.8%), nausea (39.2%), somnolence (27.5%), and tremor (27.5%); for quetiapine somnolence (63.8%), headaches (55.2%), tremor (36.2%), and dizziness (36.2%) were evidenced. Participants receiving quetiapine experienced more somnolence (p < 0.001), dizziness (p < 0.05), and weight gain (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Treatment with both lithium and quetiapine led to clinical improvement. Most study participants in this study experienced a clinical response; however, less than half of the participants in this study achieved symptomatic remission. The head-to-head comparison of both treatment groups showed quetiapine was associated with a statistically significant greater rate of response and overall symptom reduction compared with lithium. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT00893581.

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.

Effect size of lithium, carbamazepine, and sodium valproate in child and adolescent bipolar 1 disorder during manic phase: A prospective open-label study

AIM

The aim was to evaluate the "effect size (ES)," tolerability, and acceptability of lithium, carbamazepine, and sodium valproate in the acute phase treatment of pediatric Bipolar 1 disorder patients during manic phase.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This hospital-based, prospective, open-label study included 67 patients in manic phase of bipolar I disorder, aged 6-17 years, after informed consent by the caregivers. The patients were randomly assigned to the lithium group (n = 30), carbamazepine group (n = 20), and sodium valproate group (n = 17). They were assessed with the Schedule for Affective Disorders for School Age Children's-Present and Life time version administered to the parent and child separately, Conner's Abbreviated Rating Scale, and Cassidy Scale for Manic States (CSMS). Lithium was started in the dose of 30 mg per kg of body weight, carbamazepine in the dose of 10-20 mg/kg/day, and sodium valproate in the dose of 10-20 mg/kg body weight. Antipsychotic (chlorpromazine [CPZ] 100-500 mg per day or haloperidol up to 750 mg of CPZ equivalent) was allowed in the study. Injection haloperidol 10 mg and injection promethazine 50 mg intramuscular were allowed for initial 3-5 days to combat acute agitation. Rescue medication such as injection lorazepam 2-4 mg intramuscular was allowed throughout the study duration. The patients were rated weekly on CSMS, Bipolar Clinical Global Impression, Udvalg for kliniske Undersogelser Side Effect Rating Scale, and side effect checklist for lithium, sodium valproate, and carbamazepine, respectively. The serum level of concerned drug was obtained at weekly intervals and dose hiked, if needed to get target serum level.

RESULTS

The response rate was 90% in lithium group, 70% in carbamazepine group, and 88% in sodium valproate group on the basis of ≥33% reduction from baseline CSMS. The effects of change of CSMS over the 6 weeks across the three treatment group were found to be highly statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

In the acute phase treatment of pediatric bipolar 1 disorder patients during manic phase, the ES for lithium was 0.85, for carbamazepine 0.71, and for sodium valproate 0.84. These agents are well tolerated in treating bipolar disorder in children.

Efficacy and Safety Profile of Risperidone Long-acting Injection in Adolescents in a Real-life Setting

Objective

Risperidone long-acting injection (RLAI) was shown to be an alternative option in adult patients, but there is not available data in child and adolescents about this medication. The aim of this study is to evaluate the safety and efficiency profile of RLAI in a group of adolescents.

Methods

Eleven cases with conduct disorder and severe aggressive behaviors were initiated treatment with risperidone oral form. All cases were then shifted to RLAI 25 mg injection in each 15 days due to poor compliance to oral risperidone treatment. Efficiency of treatment included indicators of clinical severity and improvement, which were evaluated by Clinical Global Impression-Severity (CGI-S) and Improvement (CGI-I). Safety evaluation was performed by using Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale, and by monitoring body weight. Follow-up visits were done at the treatment initiation, and 8th, 16th, and 24th weeks of first injection.

Results

Study included 9 girls, and 2 boys, with a mean age of 14.9±1.0 years. The CGI-S scores decreased from 6.6±0.5 at the beginning to 2.2±1.1 at the last visit (p<0.001), which is a very significant decrease through better clinical level. The CGI-I scores were also improved significantly from 2.4±0.5 to 1.9±0.5 at 24th week (p=0.001). Safety parameters were also showed favorable results, which there was no significant weight gain (p=0.076), and well-tolerated extrapyramidal adverse effects.

Conclusion

Our results showed that RLAI is an efficient and safe medication option in the treatment of psychiatric disorders and severe behavioral problems in adolescents with low-compliance to oral treatment in our cases.

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Task Force report on pediatric bipolar disorder: Knowledge to date and directions for future research

OBJECTIVES

Over the past two decades, there has been tremendous growth in research regarding bipolar disorder (BD) among children and adolescents (ie, pediatric BD [PBD]). The primary purpose of this article is to distill the extant literature, dispel myths or exaggerated assertions in the field, and disseminate clinically relevant findings.

METHODS

An international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, emphasizing areas of consensus, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to mitigate these gaps.

RESULTS

Substantial, and increasingly international, research has accumulated regarding the phenomenology, differential diagnosis, course, treatment, and neurobiology of PBD. Prior division around the role of irritability and of screening tools in diagnosis has largely abated. Gold-standard pharmacologic trials inform treatment of manic/mixed episodes, whereas fewer data address bipolar depression and maintenance/continuation treatment. Adjunctive psychosocial treatment provides a forum for psychoeducation and targets primarily depressive symptoms. Numerous neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies, and increasing peripheral biomarker studies, largely converge with prior findings from adults with BD.

CONCLUSIONS

As data have accumulated and controversy has dissipated, the field has moved past existential questions about PBD toward defining and pursuing pressing clinical and scientific priorities that remain. The overall body of evidence supports the position that perceptions about marked international (US vs elsewhere) and developmental (pediatric vs adult) differences have been overstated, although additional research on these topics is warranted. Traction toward improved outcomes will be supported by continued emphasis on pathophysiology and novel therapeutics.

Longitudinal course and characteristics of cyclothymic disorder in youth

OBJECTIVES

Epidemiological studies suggest that cyclothymic disorder is the most prevalent subtype of bipolar disorder (BD). However, it is rarely diagnosed, especially in youth. This may be because it can be difficult to ascertain whether a youth meets diagnostic criteria. Clearer, easy-to-apply criteria could reduce misdiagnosis. The objective oftable this study was to determine whether proposed research diagnostic criteria for cyclothymic disorder (RDCyc), based on DSM-5 criteria, could be quantified and validated in youth.

METHODS

Participants from the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study were recruited based on symptoms of mania and followed prospectively. RDCyc criteria were: 1) At least one core symptom each of mania and depression; 2) one additional symptom of mania and of depression; 3) persistence over two consecutive six-month periods, and 4) impairment. Exclusionary criteria were having a [hypo]manic or depressive episode. Outcomes at the two-year follow-up were compared between RDCyc youth and other diagnostic groups (BD I/II, BD NOS/non-RDCyc cyclothymic disorder, disruptive behavior disorders [DBD], depression).

RESULTS

Thirty-seven youth met RDCyc criteria. There were no consistent differences between the RDCyc youth and youth with other BD subtypes (ps=0.001-0.960, with all-but-one p value >0.02). RDCyc youth had higher depression (p<0.0005) and mania scores (p=0.001), lower functioning (p=0.012), and higher suicide risk than DBD youth (p=0.001). They had higher mania scores than depressed youth (p.018).

LIMITATIONS

The majority of youth in the sample were recruited due to elevated symptoms of mania, which may limit the generalizability of the results. Youth were followed for two years, which may not be long enough to determine whether or not they will eventually develop a manic or depressive episode.

CONCLUSIONS

Applying RDCyc criteria identified youth who were similar to others with BD and were more impaired than those with DBD. Using these criteria could reduce misdiagnosis and increase our understanding of this prevalent, but largely ignored, diagnosis.

BDNF Val66Met polymorphism and peripheral protein levels in pediatric bipolar disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder

OBJECTIVE

Frontiers between pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) are not well defined. Few studies have addressed potentially different neurobiological factors between the two disorders. Brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) has been increasingly recognized for its etiologic and prognostic role in adult bipolar disorder (BD) studies. This study aimed to examine the BDNF gene polymorphism and potential alterations in BDNF serum levels in the pediatric ADHD patients with or without comorbid BD illness.

METHOD

We assessed the non-synonymous single-nucleotide polymorphism in the BDNF gene (rs6265/Val66Met) and its serum levels in children and adolescents with BD comorbid with ADHD (BD + ADHD) and ADHD alone. Children and adolescents were assessed for psychiatric diagnoses using the Kiddie-Sads-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL).

RESULTS

Using Analysis of covariance (ancova) we detected a significant group effect (patients with BD + ADHD had higher serum levels than those with ADHD - F80,3 = 8.73, P = 0.005).

CONCLUSION

Although the Val66Met polymorphism at the BDNF gene does not seem to play a significant role in children and adolescents with BD or ADHD, BDNF serum levels deserve further attention in future research on neurobiological aspects of BD and ADHD.

Neurocognitive impairments among youth with pediatric bipolar disorder: a systematic review of neuropsychological research

BACKGROUND

Pediatric bipolar disorder (PBD) has emerged as a field of research in which neuropsychological studies are continuously providing new empirical findings. Despite this, a comprehensive framework for neurocognitive impairments is still lacking, and most of the evidence remains unconnected. We addressed this question through a systematic review of neuropsychological research, with the aim of elucidating the main issues concerning this topic.

METHOD

A comprehensive search of databases (PubMed, PsycINFO) was performed. Published manuscripts between 1990 and January 2014 were identified. Overall, 124 studies fulfilled inclusion criteria. Methodological differences between studies required a descriptive review of findings.

RESULTS

Evidence indicates that verbal/visual-spatial memory, processing speed, working memory, and social cognition are neurocognitive domains impaired in PBD youth. Furthermore, these deficits are greater among those who suffer acute affective symptoms, PBD type I, and/or attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) comorbidity. In addition, several neurocognitive deficits imply certain changes in prefrontal cortex activity and are somewhat associated with psychosocial and academic disabilities. Strikingly, these deficits are consistently similar to those encountered in ADHD as well as severe mood dysregulation (SMD). Besides, some neurocognitive impairments appear before the onset of the illness and tend to maintain stable across adolescence. Finally, any therapy has not yet demonstrated to be effective on diminishing these neurocognitive impairments.

LIMITATIONS

More prolonged follow-up studies aimed at delineating the course of treatment and the response to it are warranted.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite noteworthy research on the neurocognitive profile of PBD, our knowledge is still lagging behind evidence from adult counterparts.