Search

[EN] Bipolar disorder (BD) might be associated with higher infection rates of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) which in turn could result in worsening the clinical course and outcome. This may be due to a high prevalence of somatic comorbidities and an increased risk of delays in and poorer treatment of somatic disease in patients with severe mental illness in general. Vaccination is the most important public health intervention to tackle the ongoing pandemic. We undertook a systematic review regarding the data on vaccinations in individuals with BD. Proportion of prevalence rates, efficacy and specific side effects of vaccinations and in individuals with BD were searched. Results show that only five studies have investigated vaccinations in individuals with BD, which substantially limits the interpretation of overall findings. Studies on antibody production after vaccinations in BD are very limited and results are inconsistent. Also, the evidence-based science on side effects of vaccinations in individuals with BD so far is poor.

This narrative review summarizes and discusses the implications of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM)-5 and the upcoming International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-11 classification systems on the prevalence of bipolar disorder and on the validity of the DSM-5 diagnosis of bipolar disorder according to the Robin and Guze criteria of diagnostic validity. Here we review and discuss current data on the prevalence of bipolar disorder diagnosed according to DSM-5 versus DSM-IV, and data on characteristics of bipolar disorder in the two diagnostic systems in relation to extended Robin and Guze criteria: 1) clinical presentation, 2) associations with para-clinical data such as brain imaging and blood-based biomarkers, 3) delimitation from other disorders, 4) associations with family history / genetics, 5) prognosis and long-term follow-up, and 6) treatment effects. The review highlights that few studies have investigated consequences for the prevalence of the diagnosis of bipolar disorder and for the validity of the diagnosis. Findings from these studies suggest a substantial decrease in the point prevalence of a diagnosis of bipolar with DSM-5 compared with DSM-IV, ranging from 30–50%, but a smaller decrease in the prevalence during lifetime, corresponding to a 6% reduction. It is concluded that it is likely that the use of DSM-5 and ICD-11 will result in diagnostic delay and delayed early intervention in bipolar disorder. Finally, we recommend areas for future research.

[EN] Bipolar disorder (BD) is a major healthcare and socio-economic challenge. Despite its substan- tial burden on society, the research activity in BD is much smaller than its economic impact appears to demand. There is a consensus that the accurate identification of the underlying pathophysiology for BD is fundamental to realize major health benefits through better treat- ment and preventive regimens. However, to achieve these goals requires coordinated action and innovative approaches to boost the discovery of the neurobiological underpinnings of BD, and rapid translation of research findings into development and testing of better and more spe- cific treatments. To this end, we here propose that only a large-scale coordinated action can be successful in integrating international big-data approaches with real-world clinical inter- ventions. This could be achieved through the creation of a Global Bipolar Disorder Foundation, which could bring government, industry and philanthropy together in common cause. A global initiative for BD research would come at a highly opportune time given the seminal advances promised for our understanding of the genetic and brain basis of the disease and the obvious areas of unmet clinical need. Such an endeavour would embrace the principles of open science and see the strong involvement of user groups and integration of dissemination and public involvement with the research programs. We believe the time is right for a step change in our approach to understanding, treating and even preventing BD effectively.

Objective Most patients with bipolar disorders (BD) exhibit prodromal symptoms before a first (hypo)manic episode. Patients with clinically significant symptoms fulfilling at-risk criteria for serious mental illness (SMI) require effective and safe treatment. Cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy (CBT) has shown promising results in early stages of BD and in patients at high risk for psychosis. We aimed to investigate whether group CBT can improve symptoms and functional deficits in young patients at risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms. Method In a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, patients at clinical risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms aged 15-30 years were randomized to 14 weeks of at-risk for BD-specific group CBT or unstructured group meetings. Primary efficacy endpoints were differences in affective symptomatology and psychosocial functioning at 14 weeks. At-risk status was defined as a combination of subthreshold bipolar symptomatology, reduction of psychosocial functioning and a family history for (schizo)affective disorders. A prespecified interim analysis was conducted at 75% of the targeted sample. Results Of 128 screened participants, 75 were randomized to group CBT (n = 38, completers = 65.8%) vs unstructured group meetings (n = 37, completers = 78.4%). Affective symptomatology and psychosocial functioning improved significantly at week 14 (P < .001) and during 6 months (P < .001) in both groups, without significant between-group differences. Findings are limited by the interim character of the analysis, the use of not fully validated early detection interviews, a newly adapted intervention manual, and the substantial drop-outs. Conclusions Results suggest that young patients at-risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms benefit from early group sessions. The degree of specificity and psychotherapeutic interaction needed requires clarification.

BACKGROUND: Lithium is recommended as a first line treatment for bipolar disorders. However, only 30% of patients show an optimal outcome and variability in lithium response and tolerability is poorly understood. It remains difficult for clinicians to reliably predict which patients will benefit without recourse to a lengthy treatment trial. Greater precision in the early identification of individuals who are likely to respond to lithium is a significant unmet clinical need.STRUCTURE: The H2020-funded Response to Lithium Network (R-LiNK; http://www.r-link.eu.com/ ) will undertake a prospective cohort study of over 300 individuals with bipolar-I-disorder who have agreed to commence a trial of lithium treatment following a recommendation by their treating clinician. The study aims to examine the early prediction of lithium response, non-response and tolerability by combining systematic clinical syndrome subtyping with examination of multi-modal biomarkers (or biosignatures), including omics, neuroimaging, and actigraphy, etc. Individuals will be followed up for 24 months and an independent panel will assess and classify each participants' response to lithium according to predefined criteria that consider evidence of relapse, recurrence, remission, changes in illness activity or treatment failure (e.g. stopping lithium; new prescriptions of other mood stabilizers) and exposure to lithium. Novel elements of this study include the recruitment of a large, multinational, clinically representative sample specifically for the purpose of studying candidate biomarkers and biosignatures; the application of lithium-7 magnetic resonance imaging to explore the distribution of lithium in the brain; development of a digital phenotype (using actigraphy and ecological momentary assessment) to monitor daily variability in symptoms; and economic modelling of the cost-effectiveness of introducing biomarker tests for the customisation of lithium treatment into clinical practice.

AIMS: To systematically review the literature on the efficacy and tolerability of the major chronotherapeutic treatments of bipolar disorders (BD) - bright light therapy (LT), dark therapy (DT), treatments utilizing sleep deprivation (SD), melatonergic agonists (MA), interpersonal social rhythm therapy (IPSRT) and cognitive behavioral therapy adapted for BD (CBTI-BP) - and propose treatment recommendations based on a synthesis of the evidence.METHODS: PRISMA-based systematic review of the literature.RESULTS: The acute antidepressant (AD) efficacy of LT was supported by several open-label studies, 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 pseudorandomized controlled trial. SD showed rapid, acute AD response rates of 43.9%, 59.3% and 59.4% in 8 case series, 11 uncontrolled, studies, and 1 RCT respectively. Adjunctive DT obtained significant, rapid anti-manic results in one RCT and one controlled study. The 7 studies on MA yielded very limited data on acute antidepressant activity, conflicting evidence of both antimanic and maintenance efficacy, and support from two case series of improved sleep in both acute and euthymic states. IPSRT monotherapy for bipolar II depression had acute response rates of 41%, 67% and 67.4% in two open studies and one RCT, respectively; as adjunctive therapy for bipolar depression in one RCT, and efficacy in reducing relapse in 2 RCTs. Among euthymic BD subjects with insomnia, a single RCT found CBTI-BP effective in delaying manic relapse and improving sleep. Chronotherapies were generally safe and well-tolerated.CONCLUSIONS: The outcome literature on the adjunctive use of chronotherapeutic treatments for BP is variable, with evidence bases that differ in size, study quality, level of evidence, and non-standardized treatment protocols. Evidence-informed practice recommendations are offered.