Melancholic versus Nonmelancholic Major Depression Compared.

BACKGROUND: The concept of melancholia has been associated with psychiatric nosology for centuries. Nevertheless, its definition, relationship to the contemporary concept of Major Depressive Disorder, and clinical implications remain uncertain. METHODS: In a total sample of 3211 closely evaluated patient-subjects diagnosed with DSM-5 Major Depressive or Bipolar Disorder and meeting DSM-5 criteria for major depression with melancholic features or not at a European mood disorder center, we matched 1833 for depression severity (baseline HDRS21 score ≥18) and compared rates and ratings of characteristics of interest between the subgroups, using bivariate and multivariate methods. RESULTS: Observed prevalence of melancholic features was 35.2% in the 1833 subjects matched for severity, and 21.0% among all 3211 subjects. Diagnosis was highly dependent on depression-severity measured three ways. Very few clinical characteristics differed between melancholic and nonmelancholic subjects matched for illness-severity; more suicidal ideation with melancholic features was a notable exception. CONCLUSIONS: Study findings leave the distinction of melancholic features from depression-severity unclear and the potential clinical value of diagnosing melancholic features uncertain.

Characteristics of depressive and bipolar disorder patients with mixed features.

OBJECTIVE: To assess differences between subjects with vs. without mixed features in major affective disorders. METHODS: In 3099 out-patient subjects with DSM-5 major depressive disorder (MDD, n = 1921) or bipolar disorders (BD, n = 1178), we compared those with (Mx) vs. without (Non-Mx) mixed features (agitated-irritable depression or dysphoric [hypo]mania) in an index episode. RESULTS: Prevalence of Mx averaged 21.9% [CI: 20.5-23.4] overall, ranking: BD-II > BD-I > MDD, and in BD depression ≥ [hypo]mania > MDD. Mx subjects were significantly more likely than Non-Mx cases to (i) have other mixed episodes, (ii) have higher irritable and agitated ratings, (iii) have more substance abuse, (iv) switch into mixed episodes, (v) have more suicide attempts and higher suicidal ratings, (vi) change diagnosis from depression to BD, (vii) have higher hypomania scores when depressed or depression scores when [hypo]manic, (viii) be unmarried or separated with fewer children and siblings, (ix) be diagnosed more with BD than MDD, (x) be unemployed, (xi) have BD, suicide and divorce among first-degree relatives, (xii) be female, (xiii) be younger at illness-onset. Both BD and MDD Mx subjects also received antidepressants less, but antipsychotics and mood-stabilizers more, alone and in combination with antidepressants. CONCLUSIONS: Mood disorder subjects with agitated-irritable depression or dysphoric [hypo]mania differed from those without such mixed features, including having a less favorable clinical course and repeated mixed episodes. They may represent a distinct and prevalent, syndromal clinical subtype with prognostic and therapeutic significance.

Comparison of psychotic bipolar disorder, schizoaffective disorder, and schizophrenia: an international, multisite study.

OBJECTIVE: Nosological distinctions among schizoaffective disorder (SA), bipolar I disorder with psychotic features (BDp), and schizophrenia (SZ) remain unresolved. METHOD: We compared 2269 subjects with psychotic features in DSM-IV-TR diagnoses (1435 BDp, 463 SZ, 371 SA) from 8 collaborating international sites, by 12 sociodemographic and clinical measures, all between diagnostic pairs. RESULTS: In bivariate comparisons, SA was consistently intermediate between BDp and SZ for 11/12 features (except onset stressors), and SZ vs. BDp differed in all 12 factors. SA differed from both BDp and SZ in 9/12 factors: SA and BDp were similar in education and suicidal ideation or acts; SA and SZ were similar in education, onset stressors, and substance abuse. Meta-analytic comparisons of diagnostic pairs for 10 categorical factors indicated similar differences of SA from both SZ and BDp. Multivariate modeling indicated significantly independent differences between BDp and SZ (8 factors), SA vs. SZ (5), and BDp vs. SA (3). Measurement variance was similar for all diagnoses. CONCLUSION: SA was consistently intermediate between BDp and SZ. The three diagnostic groups ranked: BDp > SA > SZ related to lesser morbidity or disability. The findings are not consistent with a dyadic Kraepelinian categorization, although the considerable overlap among the three DSM-IV diagnostic groups indicates uncertain boundaries if they represent distinct disorders.

Treatments for acute bipolar depression: meta-analyses of placebo-controlled, monotherapy trials of anticonvulsants, lithium and antipsychotics.

BACKGROUND: Optimal treatments for bipolar depression, and the relative value of specific drugs for that purpose, remain uncertain, including agents other than antidepressants. METHODS: We searched for reports of placebo-controlled, monotherapy trials of mood-stabilizing anticonvulsants, second-generation antipsychotics, or lithium for acute major depressive episodes in patients diagnosed with type I or II bipolar disorder and applied random-effects meta-analysis to evaluate their efficacy, comparing outcomes based on standardized mean drug-placebo differences (SMD) in improvement, relative response rates (RR), and number-needed-to-treat (NNT). RESULTS: We identified 24 trials of 10 treatments (lasting 7.5 weeks, with ≥ 50 collaborating sites/trial) that met eligibility criteria: lamotrigine (5 trials), quetiapine (5), valproate (4), 2 each for aripiprazole, olanzapine, ziprasidone, and 1 each for carbamazepine, lithium, lurasidone, and olanzapine-fluoxetine. Overall, pooled drug-over-placebo responder-rate superiority (RR) was moderate (29% [CI: 19-40%]), and NNT was 8.2 (CI: 6.4-11). By SMD, apparent efficacy ranked: olanzapine + fluoxetine ≥ valproate > quetiapine > lurasidone > olanzapine, aripiprazole, and carbamazepine; ziprasidone was ineffective, and lithium remains inadequately studied. Notably, drugs were superior to placebo in only 11/24 trials (5/5 with quetiapine, 2/4 with valproate), and only lamotrigine, quetiapine and valproate had > 2 trials. Treatment-associated mania-like reactions were uncommon (drugs: 3.7%; placebo: 4.7%). DISCUSSION: Controlled trials of non-antidepressant treatments for bipolar depression remain scarce, but findings with olanzapine-fluoxetine, lurasidone, quetiapine, and perhaps carbamazepine and valproate were encouraging; lithium requires adequate testing.

Predominant recurrence polarity among 928 adult international bipolar I disorder patients.

OBJECTIVE: To test the hypothesis that patients with bipolar disorder (BPD) differ demographically and clinically within subgroups based on the predominant-polarity of major recurrences. METHOD: We tested factors for association with predominantly (≥2 : 1) depressive vs. mania-like episodes with 928 DSM-IV type-I BPD subjects from five international sites. RESULTS: Factors preliminarily associated with predominant-depression included: electroconvulsive treatment, longer latency-to-BPD diagnosis, first episode depressive or mixed, more suicide attempts, more Axis-II comorbidity, ever having mixed-states, ever married, and female sex. Predominant-mania was associated with: initial manic or psychotic episodes, more drug abuse, more education, and more family psychiatric history. Of the 47.3% of subjects without polarity-predominance, risks for all factors considered were intermediate. Expanding the definition of polarity-predominance to ≥51% added little, but shifting mixed-states to 'predominant-depression' increased risk of suicidal acts from 2.4- to 4.5-fold excess over predominant-mania-hypomania, and suicidal risk was associated continuously with increasing proportions of depressive or mixed episodes. CONCLUSION: Subtyping by predominant-polarity yielded predictive associations, including the polarity of first episodes and risk of suicide attempts. Such subtyping may contribute to improve planning of clinical care and to biological studies of BPD.

Stigma and functioning in patients with bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of self-rated stigma and functioning in patients with bipolar disorder in Latin-America. METHODS: Two-hundred and forty-one participants with bipolar disorder were recruited from three Latin American countries (Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia). Functional impairment was assessed with the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) and experiences with and impact of perceived stigma was evaluated using the Inventory of Stigmatizing Experiences (ISE). RESULTS: Higher scores of self-perceived stigma were correlated with lower scores of functioning. After multiple regression analysis, being on disability benefit, current mood symptoms and functioning were associated with self-perceived stigma. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to demonstrate an association between stigma and poor functioning in bipolar disorder. Possible implications of such findings for practitioners are discussed. LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study is that the Inventory of Stigmatizing Experiences has not yet been validated in a population of bipolar patients in our countries. The sample size and heterogeneous clinical subjects from different countries and cultures limit the generalization of the present findings.

Functional impairment in bipolar II disorder: is it as disabling as bipolar I?

INTRODUCTION: It is well established that patients with bipolar disorder experience functional impairment even in remission. Nevertheless, bipolar II disorder remains understudied because most investigations to date include only bipolar I patients or just a small sample of bipolar II patients, without explicitly comparing both subtypes of disorder. The main objective of the current report is to evaluate overall and multiple domains of functioning, specifically in bipolar II disorder compared to patients with bipolar I disorder and healthy subjects. METHODS: 233 subjects from 3 groups were compared: bipolar I patients (n=106), bipolar II patients (n=66) and healthy controls (n=61). Bipolar patients meeting criteria of remission were recruited at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and at different study sites in Argentina. All participants were assessed with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST). Clinical and sociodemographic data were also recorded. RESULTS: Both subgroups of patients, bipolar I and bipolar II, showed lower overall functioning (p<0.001) and in each domain of the FAST scale (all, p<0.001) when compared to the healthy control group. Tukey post hoc test revealed that bipolar II patients scored worse in the cognitive domain compared to bipolar I patients. However, after controlling for potential confounding variables, this difference disappeared and only older age (p<0.005) and HAM-D scores (p<0.001) remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that bipolar II patients are as disabled as bipolar I patients. This may be explained, in part, because bipolar II patients experience greater lifetime residual depressive symptoms than the bipolar I subgroup, which may have particular impact on cognitive domains of functioning.

Hyperthymic temperament may protect against suicidal ideation.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to investigate the role of hyperthymic temperament in suicidal ideation between a sample of patients with affective disorders (unipolar and bipolar). METHOD: We investigated affective disorders outpatients (unipolar, bipolar I, II and NOS) treated in eleven participating centres during at least a six-month period. DSM-IV diagnosis was made by psychiatrists experienced in mood disorders, using the corresponding modules of the Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview (MINI). In addition, bipolar NOS diagnoses were extended by guidelines for bipolar spectrum symptoms as proposed by Akiskal and Pinto in 1999. Thereby we also identified NOS III (switch by antidepressants) and NOS IV (hyperthymic temperament) bipolar subtypes. All patients completed the Beck Depression Inventory (BDI). We screened a total sample of 411 patients (69% bipolar), 352 completed all the clinical scales without missing any item. RESULTS: No statistical significant difference in suicidal ideation (measure by BDI item 9 responses) was found between bipolar and unipolar patients (4.5% vs. 9.1%, respectively). On the group of bipolar patients, suicidal ideation was slightly more frequent among bipolar NOS compared with bipolar I and II (p value 0.094 and 0.086, respectively), interestingly we found a statistical significant less common suicidal ideation among bipolar subtype IV (with hyperthymic temperament) compared with bipolar NOS patients (p value 0.048). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that those subjects with hyperthymic temperament displayed less suicidal ideation. This finding supports the hypothesis that this particular affective temperament could be a protective factor against suicide among affective patients. LIMITATION: The original objective of the national study was the cross validation between MDQ and BSDS in patients with affective disorders in our country. This report arises from a secondary analysis of the original data.