Quantification of diet quality utilizing the rapid eating assessment for participants-shortened version in bipolar disorder: Implications for prospective depression and cardiometabolic studies.

OBJECTIVES: Recognizing bipolar disorder as a multi-system metabolic condition driven, in part, by binge eating behavior and atypical depressive symptoms, this study aimed to quantify diet quality and evaluate clinical correlates in a bipolar disorder cohort. METHODS: Participants from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Disorder Biobank (n = 734) completed the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants - Shortened version (REAP-S) to determine diet quality. The average REAP-S score for a U.S. omnivorous diet is 32 (range 13 to 39) with higher scores indicating healthier diet. Demographic variables were collected in a standardized clinical questionnaire. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale. Cardiometabolic variables were retrieved from the electronic health record. Associations between continuous variables and REAP-S scores (total, 'healthy foods' and 'avoidance of unhealthy foods') were assessed using linear regression. RESULTS: Overall, our sample had a mean REAP-S score of 27.6 (4.9), suggestive of a lower diet quality than the average general population in the US. There was a significant inverse relationship between mean REAP-S lower scores with increased BMI, waist circumference, disordered eating and depression. All these associations were significantly stronger in female participants. LIMITATIONS: EHR cross-sectional data. CONCLUSIONS: Our data suggest unhealthy diet quality in bipolar disorder is associated with depression, obesity and cardiometabolic abnormalities. Additional work is encouraged to prospectively track mood and diet quality to further understand the bidirectional relationship and clarify if dietary interventions can positively impact mood. Further delineating potential sex differences in diet quality and depression may provide greater appreciation of modifiable risk factors for future cardiometabolic burden.

Clinical features of bipolar spectrum with binge eating behaviour.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether bipolar spectrum disorder with binge eating behavior (BE) is an important clinical sub-phenotype. METHODS: Prevalence rates and correlates of different levels of BE were assessed in 1114 bipolar spectrum patients participating in a genetic biobank. BE and eating disorders (EDs) were assessed with the Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale (EDDS). Psychiatric illness burden was evaluated with measures of suicidality, psychosis, mood instability, anxiety disorder comorbidity, and substance abuse comorbidity. Medical illness burden was evaluated with body mass index (BMI) and the Cumulative Index Rating Scale (CIRS). RESULTS: Thirty percent of patients had any BE and 27% had BE plus an ED diagnosis. Compared with bipolar spectrum patients without BE, bipolar spectrum patients with BE were younger and more likely to be female; had significantly higher levels of eating psychopathology, suicidality, mood instability, and anxiety disorder comorbidity; had a significantly higher mean BMI and a significantly higher rate of obesity; and had a significantly higher medical illness burden. Bipolar spectrum patients with BE but no ED diagnosis were more similar to bipolar spectrum patients without BE than to those with an ED. Nonetheless, the positive predictive value and specificity of BE predicting an ED was 0.90 and 0.96, respectively. LIMITATIONS: As only two patients had co-occurring anorexia nervosa, these results may not generalize to bipolar spectrum patients with restricting EDs. CONCLUSION: Bipolar spectrum disorder with broadly-defined BE may not be as clinically relevant a sub-phenotype as bipolar spectrum disorder with an ED but may be an adequate proxy for the latter when phenotyping large samples of individuals.

Current landscape, unmet needs, and future directions for treatment of bipolar depression.

BACKGROUND: Depression is the predominant pole of illness disability in bipolar disorder and, compared with acute mania, has less systematic research guiding treatment development. The aim of this review is to present the therapeutic options currently available for managing bipolar depression and to highlight areas of unmet need and future research. METHODS: Literature search of PubMed, PsycINFO, and Cochrane databases and bibliographies from 2000 to August 2013 for treatments that have regulatory approval for bipolar depression or early controlled preliminary data on efficacy. RESULTS: Treatment options for bipolar depression have increased over the last decade, most notably with regulatory approval for olanzapine/fluoxetine combination, quetiapine, and lurasidone. Conventional mood stabilizers lamotrigine and divalproex have meta-analyses suggesting acute antidepressant response. Manual-based psychotherapies also appear to be effective in treating bipolar depression. The therapeutic utility of unimodal antidepressants, as a class, for the treatment of patients with bipolar depression, as a group, remains to be confirmed. There is a substantially unmet need to develop new interventions that are efficacious, effective, and have low side effect burden. LIMITATIONS: Additional compounds are currently being developed that may ultimately be applicable to the treatment of bipolar depression and early open-trial data encourage further studies, but both of these topics are beyond the scope of this review. CONCLUSION: Future registrational trials will need to establish initial efficacy, but increasing interest for personalized or individualized medicine will encourage further studies on individual predictors or biomarkers of response.

A multinational study to pilot the modified Hypomania Checklist (mHCL) in the assessment of mixed depression.

BACKGROUND: Mixed depression is a common, dimensional phenomenon that is increasingly recognized in unipolar and bipolar disorders. We piloted a modified version of the Hypomania Checklist (mHCL-32) to assess the prevalence and clinical correlates of concurrent manic (hypo) symptoms in depressed patients. METHODS: The mHCL-32, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAMD-24) were utilized in the assessment of unipolar (UP=61) and bipolar (BP=44) patients with an index major depressive episode confirmed by the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID). Differential mHLC-32 item endorsement was compared between UP and BP. Correlation analyses assessed the association of symptom dimensions measured by mHCL-32, YMRS and HAMD-24. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between mood groups in the mean mHCL-32 and YMRS scores. Individual mHLC-32 items of increased libido, quarrels, and caffeine intake were endorsed more in BP vs. UP patients. The mHCL-32 active-elevated subscale score was positively correlated with the YMRS in BP patients and negatively correlated with HAMD-24 in UP patients. Conversely, the mHCL-32 irritable-risk taking subscale score was positively correlated with HAMD-24 in BP and with YMRS in UP patients. LIMITATIONS: Small sample size and cross-sectional design. CONCLUSION: Modifying the HCL to screen for (hypo) manic symptoms in major depression may have utility in identifying mixed symptoms in both bipolar vs. unipolar depression. Further research is encouraged to quantify mixed symptoms with standardized assessments.

Clinical phenotype of bipolar disorder with comorbid binge eating disorder.

BACKGROUND: To explore the relationship between binge eating disorder (BED) and obesity in patients with bipolar disorder (BP). METHODS: 717 patients participating in the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank completed structured diagnostic interviews and questionnaires for demographic and illness-related variables. They also had weight and height measured to determine body mass index (BMI). The effects of BED and obesity (BMI≥30 kg/m(2)), as well as their interaction, were assessed on one measure of general medical burden and six proxies of psychiatric illness burden. RESULTS: 9.5% of patients received a clinical diagnosis of BED and 42.8% were obese. BED was associated with a significantly elevated BMI. Both BED and obesity were associated with greater psychiatric and general illness burden, but illness burden profiles differed. After controlling for obesity, BED was associated with suicidality, psychosis, mood instability, anxiety disorder comorbidity, and substance abuse comorbidity. After controlling for BED status, obesity was associated with greater general medical comorbidity, but lower substance abuse comorbidity. There were no significant interaction effects between obesity and BED, or BMI and BED, on any illness burden outcome. LIMITATIONS: There may have been insufficient power to detect interactions between BED and obesity. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with BP, BED and obesity are highly prevalent and correlated, but associated with different profiles of enhanced illness burden. As the association of BED with greater psychiatric illness burden remained significant even after accounting for the effect of obesity, BP with BED may represent a clinically important sub-phenotype.