Bipolar depression in children and adolescents.

Children and adolescents with bipolar disorder may have depression as the presenting mood state. It is important for clinicians to distinguish between unipolar and bipolar depression in youth. Depressive episodes are common during the course of bipolar illness in children and adolescents. Evidence-based treatments are needed to guide clinicians' treatment decisions for youth with bipolar depression. This article reviews the prevalence, diagnosis, course, and treatment of bipolar depression in youth, and emphasizes the need for large, controlled treatment studies in the pediatric population.

Establishing a training plan and estimating inter-rater reliability across the multi-site Texas childhood trauma research network.

OBJECTIVE: Minimal guidance is available in the literature to develop protocols for training non-clinician raters to administer semi-structured psychiatric interviews in large, multi-site studies. Previous work has not produced standardized methods for maintaining rater quality control or estimating interrater reliability (IRR) in such studies. Our objective is to describe the multi-site Texas Childhood Trauma Research Network (TX-CTRN) rater training protocol and activities used to maintain rater calibration and evaluate protocol effectiveness. METHODS: Rater training utilized synchronous and asynchronous didactic learning modules, and certification involved critique of videotaped mock scale administration. Certified raters attended monthly review meetings and completed ongoing scoring exercises for quality assurance purposes. Training protocol effectiveness was evaluated using individual measure and pooled estimated IRRs for three key study measures (TESI-C, CAPS-CA-5, MINI-KID [Major Depressive Episodes - MDE & Posttraumatic Stress Disorder - PTSD modules]). A random selection of video-recorded administrations of these measures was evaluated by three certified raters to estimate agreement statistics, with jackknife (on the videos) used for confidence interval estimation. Kappa, weighted kappa and intraclass correlations were calculated for study measure ratings. RESULTS: IRR agreement across all measures was strong (TESI-C median kappa 0.79, lower 95% CB 0.66; CAPS-CA-5 median weighted kappa 0.71 (0.62), MINI-MDE median kappa 0.71 (0.62), MINI-PTSD median kappa 0.91 (0.9). The combined estimated ICC was ≥0.86 (lower CBs ≥0.69). CONCLUSIONS: The protocol developed by TX-CTRN may serve as a model for other multi-site studies that require comprehensive non-clinician rater training, quality assurance guidelines, and a system for assessing and estimating IRR.

Characterizing patterns of substance use in trauma exposed youth.

OBJECTIVE: Previous work investigating the impact of childhood trauma on substance use and co-occurring psychiatric disorders has primarily been conducted in adults or on specific trauma types. This limits understanding of traumas impact in childhood and how different types of traumas play a role. We sought to characterize substance use in a sample of trauma-exposed youth in the context of psychiatric comorbidities. METHOD: 1152 youth from the Texas Childhood Trauma Research Network (TX-CTRN) that were exposed to at least one trauma meeting DSM-5 Criterion A were assessed for current substance use and psychiatric diagnoses. Latent class analysis was used to identify patterns of substance use. To characterize these patterns, we examined if demographics, number of trauma types experienced, or childhood psychiatric disorders predicted class membership. RESULTS: We identified four primary patterns of substance use: Non-use (66.1%), predominantly alcohol use (19.7%), predominantly cannabis use (4.5%), and polysubstance use (9.7%). Compared to the non-users, polysubstance users tended to be older, Non-Hispanic White, have experienced more types of trauma. They were also more likely to have fulfilled diagnostic criteria for suicidality and ADHD. Comparisons among the substance using classes were more nuanced. CONCLUSION: The findings highlight the need for universal assessments of trauma, substance misuse, and mental health symptoms in youth as the presence or absence of their co-occurrence has implications for treatment.

Antidepressant exposure as a predictor of clinical outcomes in the Treatment of Resistant Depression in Adolescents (TORDIA) study.

This paper examines the relationship between plasma concentration of antidepressant and both clinical response and adverse effects in treatment-resistant depressed adolescents. Adolescents (n = 334) with major depression who had not responded to a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) were randomized to 1 of 4 treatments: switch to another SSRI (fluoxetine, citalopram, or paroxetine), switch to venlafaxine, switch to SSRI plus cognitive behavior therapy, or switch to venlafaxine plus cognitive behavior therapy. Adolescents who did not improve by 6 weeks had their dose increased. Plasma concentrations of medication and metabolites were measured at 6 weeks in 244 participants and at 12 weeks in 204 participants. Adolescents treated with citalopram whose plasma concentration was equal to or greater than the geometric mean (GM) showed a higher response rate compared to those with less than the GM, with parallel but nonsignificant findings for fluoxetine. A dose increase of citalopram or fluoxetine at week 6 was most likely to result in response when it led to a change in concentration from less than the GM at 6 weeks to the GM or greater at week 12. Plasma levels of paroxetine, venlafaxine, or O-desmethylvenlafaxine were not related to clinical response. Exposure was associated with more cardiovascular and dermatologic side effects in those receiving venlafaxine. Antidepressant concentration may be useful in optimizing treatment for depressed adolescents receiving fluoxetine or citalopram.

Attachments: Three Wishes.

As a child and adolescent psychiatrist over the past 30 years, I have asked children and adolescents at the end of a diagnostic evaluation what are their three wishes. Why do I ask children and adolescents about their wishes? It enables me to understand their desires and to further recognize and appreciate their concerns. There are some children and teenagers who, during an evaluation, deny that they have any problems, but when asked about their wishes state they wish they weren't born or wished they had gone through with their plan to commit suicide.

Correction.

This corrects the article DOI: 10.4088/JCP.09m05885blu.​​.

Switching to another SSRI or to venlafaxine with or without cognitive behavioral therapy for adolescents with SSRI-resistant depression: the TORDIA randomized controlled trial.

CONTEXT: Only about 60% of adolescents with depression will show an adequate clinical response to an initial treatment trial with a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor (SSRI). There are no data to guide clinicians on subsequent treatment strategy. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the relative efficacy of 4 treatment strategies in adolescents who continued to have depression despite adequate initial treatment with an SSRI. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized controlled trial of a clinical sample of 334 patients aged 12 to 18 years with a primary diagnosis of major depressive disorder that had not responded to a 2-month initial treatment with an SSRI, conducted at 6 US academic and community clinics from 2000-2006. INTERVENTIONS: Twelve weeks of: (1) switch to a second, different SSRI (paroxetine, citalopram, or fluoxetine, 20-40 mg); (2) switch to a different SSRI plus cognitive behavioral therapy; (3) switch to venlafaxine (150-225 mg); or (4) switch to venlafaxine plus cognitive behavioral therapy. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement score of 2 or less (much or very much improved) and a decrease of at least 50% in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R); and change in CDRS-R over time. RESULTS: Cognitive behavioral therapy plus a switch to either medication regimen showed a higher response rate (54.8%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 47%-62%) than a medication switch alone (40.5%; 95% CI, 33%-48%; P = .009), but there was no difference in response rate between venlafaxine and a second SSRI (48.2%; 95% CI, 41%-56% vs 47.0%; 95% CI, 40%-55%; P = .83). There were no differential treatment effects on change in the CDRS-R, self-rated depressive symptoms, suicidal ideation, or on the rate of harm-related or any other adverse events. There was a greater increase in diastolic blood pressure and pulse and more frequent occurrence of skin problems during venlafaxine than SSRI treatment. CONCLUSIONS: For adolescents with depression not responding to an adequate initial treatment with an SSRI, the combination of cognitive behavioral therapy and a switch to another antidepressant resulted in a higher rate of clinical response than did a medication switch alone. However, a switch to another SSRI was just as efficacious as a switch to venlafaxine and resulted in fewer adverse effects. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00018902.

The Journal and the Academy.

Every issue of the Journal includes 2 pages between the front cover and the table of contents-1 that lists the editorial team, or masthead, who assess submissions and select content and another that lists the officers of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the Journal's sponsoring society and owner. As noted in the policies of the World Association of Medical Editors.

Genetic Risk Score Analysis in Early-Onset Bipolar Disorder.

OBJECTIVE: In this study, we performed a candidate genetic risk score (GRS) analysis of early-onset bipolar disorder (BD). METHODS: Treatment of Early Age Mania (TEAM) study enrollment and sample collection took place from 2003 to 2008. Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank samples were collected from 2009 to 2013. Genotyping and analyses for the present study took place from 2013 to 2014. The diagnosis of BD was based on Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition, Text Revision criteria. Eight single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), previously reported in genome-wide association studies to be associated with BD, were chosen for GRS analysis in early-onset bipolar disease. These SNPs map to 3 genes: CACNA1C (calcium channel, voltage-dependent, L type, alpha 1C subunit), ANK3 (ankyrin-3, node of Ranvier [ankyrin G]), and ODZ4 (teneurin transmembrane protein 4 [formerly "odz, odd Oz/10-m homolog 4 {Drosophila}, ODZ4"]). The 8 candidate SNPs were genotyped in patients from the TEAM study (n = 69); adult patients with BD (n = 732), including a subset with early-onset illness (n = 192); and healthy controls (n = 776). GRS analyses were performed to compare early-onset cases with controls. In addition, associations of early-onset BD with individual SNPs and haplotypes were explored. RESULTS: GRS analysis revealed associations of the risk score with early-onset BD (P = .01). Gene-level haplotype analysis comparing TEAM patients with controls suggested association of early-onset BD with a CACNA1C haplotype (global test, P = .01). At the level of individual SNPs, comparison of TEAM cases with healthy controls provided nominally significant evidence for association of SNP rs10848632 in CACNA1C with early-onset BD (P = .017), which did not remain significant after correction for multiple comparisons. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary analyses suggest that previously identified BD risk loci, especially CACNA1C, have a role in early-onset BD, possibly with stronger effects than for late-onset BD.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of oxcarbazepine in the treatment of bipolar disorder in children and adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: This multicenter trial examined the efficacy and safety of oxcarbazepine in the treatment of bipolar disorder in children and adolescents. METHOD: A total of 116 outpatients 7 to 18 years of age with bipolar I disorder, manic or mixed, were recruited at 20 centers in the United States and randomly assigned to receive 7 weeks of double-blinded, flexibly dosed treatment with oxcarbazepine (maximum dose 900-2400 mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change from baseline to endpoint in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), using the last-observation-carried-forward method. RESULTS: Oxcarbazepine (mean dose=1515 mg/day) did not significantly improve YMRS scores at endpoint compared with placebo [adjusted mean change: oxcarbazepine, -10.90 (N=55); placebo, -9.79 (N=55)]. Dizziness, nausea, somnolence, diplopia, fatigue, and rash were each reported in at least 5% of the patients in the oxcarbazepine group with an incidence at least twice that of the placebo group. The majority of adverse events were mild to moderate and occurred during the titration period. Eleven patients (19%) in the oxcarbazepine group discontinued the study because of adverse events, compared with two (4%) in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: Oxcarbazepine is not significantly superior to placebo in the treatment of bipolar disorder in youths. While the overall adverse event profile was similar to that reported for patients with epilepsy, the incidence of psychiatric adverse events for both the oxcarbazepine and placebo groups was higher than that reported for the epilepsy population.

Validation of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire for bipolar disorders in adolescents.

OBJECTIVE: The study was designed to determine the validity of the Mood Disorder Questionnaire-Adolescent Version (MDQ-A) as a screening instrument for bipolar disorders (I, II, not otherwise specified, and cyclothymia) in an adolescent outpatient psychiatric population. METHOD: 104 adolescents and their parents completed the MDQ-A. Three versions of the MDQ-A were compared: (1) self report of symptoms by adolescent, (2) attributional report-how the adolescent believed teachers or friends would report his/her symptoms, and (3) parent report of adolescent's symptoms. DSM-IV diagnosis was made based upon the clinician-administered Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for School-Age Children-Present and Lifetime Version (K-SADS-PL), a semistructured diagnostic interview. MDQ-A items were summed, yielding a score for each adolescent ranging from 0 to 13 on each of the 3 MDQ-A versions. Each possible scoring threshold, in combination with co-occurrence of symptoms and behaviors and with moderate to serious problems caused by symptoms, was crossed with the results of the K-SADS-PL diagnostic interview to assess sensitivity and specificity. The study was conducted from April 2002 to September 2003. RESULTS: A score of 5 or more items on the parent version yielded a sensitivity of 0.72 and specificity of 0.81, which were superior to self and attributional versions. CONCLUSIONS: The MDQ-A completed by parents about their adolescents' symptoms may be a useful screening instrument for bipolar disorders in an adolescent psychiatric outpatient population.

A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of escitalopram in the treatment of pediatric depression.

OBJECTIVE: Escitalopram is a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor antidepressant indicated for use in adults. This trial examined the efficacy and safety of escitalopram in pediatric depression. METHOD: Patients (6-17 years old) with major depressive disorder were randomized to receive 8 weeks of double-blind flexibly dosed treatment with escitalopram (10-20 mg/day; n = 131) or placebo (n = 133). Randomization was not stratified by age. The primary efficacy measure was the mean change from baseline to endpoint in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) scores, using the last observation carried forward approach. RESULTS: A total of 82% of patients completed treatment. Escitalopram did not significantly improve CDRS-R scores compared to placebo at endpoint (least squares mean difference = -1.7, p = .31; last observation carried forward). In a post hoc analysis of adolescent (ages 12-17 years) completers, escitalopram significantly improved CDRS-R scores compared with placebo (least squares mean difference = -4.6, p = .047). Headache and abdominal pain were the only adverse events in >10% of patients in the escitalopram group. Discontinuation rates caused by adverse events were 1.5% for both groups. Potential suicide-related events were observed in one escitalopram- and two placebo-treated patients. There were no completed suicides. CONCLUSIONS: Although there were no significant differences between escitalopram and placebo in the total population, the data suggest that escitalopram may have beneficial effects in adolescent patients. Escitalopram appeared to be well tolerated.

Sertraline in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To explore time to first response and time to first persistent response of sertraline versus placebo and compare these parameters between children (6-11 years old, n = 177) and adolescents (12-17 years old, n = 199) with major depressive disorder. METHOD: A 10-week placebo-controlled treatment was followed by a 24-week open-label sertraline treatment. The double-blind studies were not powered to detect efficacy differences between age groups. A post hoc analysis explored time to first response and first persistent response using the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement predefined criteria. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in time to first response or first persistent response between sertraline and placebo in children, except for time to first response on Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement. Sertraline had a significantly faster time to first persistent response in adolescents compared to placebo. Within treatment groups, children had a significantly faster time to first response than adolescents, whether treated with placebo or sertraline, but not on time to first persistent response. Both age groups showed similar improvement over 34 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSION: In the double-blind studies, children and adolescents had different patterns of response with sertraline vs. placebo.

Analysis of electrocardiographic data following use of paroxetine in pediatric depression and obsessive-compulsive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: This retrospective analysis of electrocardiographic (ECG) data investigated the cardiovascular effects of paroxetine 10-50 mg/day in pediatric patients (7-18 years of age). Data were collected from three 8- to 10-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trials of paroxetine in pediatric patients with major depressive disorder or obsessive-compulsive disorder. METHOD: Electrocardiograms (ECGs) were retrospectively retrieved from 63 study sites in the United States and Canada. Only patients with at least one screening and one on-treatment ECG were included. ECGs were analyzed for heart rate, QT interval corrected using Bazett's formula (QTcB) and Fridericia's formula (QTcF), at screening and while being treated. PR, R-R, and QRS intervals and the maximum change in QTcB and QTcF from screening to endpoint were determined. Clinically significant thresholds were defined a priori. RESULTS: A total of 1,451 ECGs from 449 patients receiving placebo (n = 207), paroxetine (n = 200), or imipramine (n = 42) were analyzed. Treatment with paroxetine did not significantly increase QTcB or QTcF or any ECG parameters compared with placebo. Treatment with imipramine significantly increased heart rate and QTcB, R-R, and QRS intervals compared with either paroxetine or placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Data from this retrospective study indicate that paroxetine (10-50 mg/day) is unlikely to be associated with significant ECG changes in medically healthy pediatric patients.

Paroxetine treatment in children and adolescents with major depressive disorder: a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of paroxetine in pediatric major depressive disorder. METHOD: Subjects 7 to 17 years old with major depressive disorder received paroxetine (10-50 mg/day) or placebo for 8 weeks from 2000 to 2001. The primary efficacy measure was change from baseline in the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised total score at week 8 last observation carried forward). Safety was primarily assessed by spontaneous reporting of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 206 patients (intent to treat) were randomized to paroxetine (n = 104) or placebo (n = 102). Week 8 Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised total score adjusted mean changes from baseline for patients receiving paroxetine and placebo were -22.58 (SE 1.47) and -23.38 points (SE 1.60), respectively (0.80, 95% confidence interval -3.09 to 4.69, p = 0.684). Increased cough (5.9% versus 2.9%), dyspepsia (5.9% versus 2.9%), vomiting (5.9% versus 2.0%), and dizziness (5.0% versus 1.0%) occurred in >or=5% of the paroxetine group and at least twice that of the placebo group. Six of 104 (5.8%) paroxetine patients reported serious adverse events compared to 1 placebo patient (1.0%). The incidence of adverse events of suicidal behavior and/or ideation while taking study medication (excluding taper) was 1.92% (2/104) for paroxetine versus 0.98% (1/102) for placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Paroxetine was not shown to be more efficacious than placebo for treating pediatric major depressive disorder.

Child and adolescent psychopharmacology in the new millennium: a workshop for academia, industry, and government.

OBJECTIVE: To give academic researchers, government officials, and industry scientists an opportunity to assess the state of pediatric psychopharmacology and identify challenges facing professionals in the field. METHOD: Increased federal spending and the introduction of pediatric exclusivity led to large increases in pediatric psychopharmacology research in the 1990s. Despite the increase in research, concerns exist about methods and incentives for making new medications available for use in pediatric psychiatric disorders. In recognition of these concerns, the Duke Clinical Research Institute held a roundtable in September 2004. Participants from the National Institutes of Health, regulatory agencies, academia, and the pharmaceutical industry spoke about the effects of government regulations such as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration Modernization Act and the Pediatric Research Equity Act on pediatric research from academic, clinical, and industry perspectives, and bioethical considerations of such research. CONCLUSIONS: To ensure development of new drugs for treating psychiatric disorders in children and adolescents, we must address the challenges posed by the regulatory environment governing pediatric psychopharmacology research. Strategies were identified for improving the evidence base for psychopharmacologic interventions in youth before widespread use and for more effectively defining a research agenda for the future.

Youths' and their parents' attitudes and experiences about participation in psychopharmacology treatment research.

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to prospectively assess youths' and their parents' attitudes and experiences about participation in clinical treatment research. METHOD: Pre- and post-questionnaires were administered to 90 youths ages 6-17 years with psychiatric disorders who participated in clinical treatment studies and their parents between August 2000 and March 2004. RESULTS: The majority of youths (63%) and parents (90%) reported that finding out about the youth's problem and receiving treatment were the main reasons for participation in the clinical treatment studies. Percentage of youths and parents, respectively, who confirmed that informed consent issues were discussed were: Purpose of study (96%, 100%), study procedures (94%, 100%), alternative treatment (62%, 94%), and voluntary participation (89%, 99%). Most youths liked their treatment (98%), believed the study proceeded as expected (67%), were glad to have participated in this study (94%), and would participate in another study (65%). Most parents believed the quality of care was good (90%), the study proceeded as expected (96%), and were glad their child participated (99%). CONCLUSIONS: The majority of youths and parents had a positive view about their experiences of participating in clinical treatment research, independent of whether or not the youth's psychiatric condition improved.

Long-term sertraline treatment of children and adolescents with major depressive disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess the long-term safety, tolerability, and efficacy of sertraline 50-200 mg once-daily in children (6-11 year olds) and adolescents (12-18 year olds) with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition (DSM-IV) diagnosis of major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: This study consisted of a 24-week open-label observational study of children and adolescents who had completed either of two 10-week double-blind, placebo-controlled trials. The Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) was the primary measure of efficacy. RESULTS: Two hundred ninety nine (299) patients completed the acute studies and were eligible for the extension study. Of these, 226 enrolled, but 5 did not receive treatment. Of 221 patients (107 children and 114 adolescents), 62.4% completed the study. The endpoint mean daily dose was 109.9 mg/day. The mean decrease in CDRS-R score from double-blind baseline was 34.8 points (p < 0.001), with patients showing continued improvement in CDRS-R scores regardless of which treatment they received in the double-blind studies. At endpoint, 86% of patients met CDRS-R responder and 58% CDRS-R remitter criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Sertraline appears to be well tolerated and safe over 24 weeks of treatment in children and adolescents with MDD. Children and adolescents treated with sertraline appear to have increased improvement over that seen in the first 10 weeks of treatment. These findings need confirmation in placebo-controlled studies.

Fluoxetine 40-60 mg versus fluoxetine 20 mg in the treatment of children and adolescents with a less-than-complete response to nine-week treatment with fluoxetine 10-20 mg: a pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare fluoxetine dosage titration to 40-60 mg/day with fixed fluoxetine 20-mg/day treatment for an additional 10 weeks in pediatric outpatients with major depressive disorder (MDD) who had not met protocol-defined response criteria after 9-week acute fluoxetine treatment. METHODS: Patients unresponsive (less than or equal to 30% decrease in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R] score) after 9-week fluoxetine treatment were randomly reassigned to continue at 20 mg/day or to increase to 40 mg/day. After 4 weeks, patients unresponsive to 40 mg/day could receive 60 mg/day. RESULTS: Twenty-nine (29) patients, 9-17 years of age, received fluoxetine 40-60 mg/day (n = 14) or 20 mg/day (n = 15). At the conclusion of this study phase, 10 patients (71%) on 40-60 mg/day met the response criteria, versus 5 patients (36%) on 20 mg/day (p = 0.128). Mean CDRS-R scores improved in both treatment groups (fluoxetine 40-60 mg/day, -9.4; fluoxetine 20 mg/day, -1.5; p = 0.099). Adverse events were similar in both groups. However, this study phase was statistically underpowered for detecting differences between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: More than two thirds of patients whose dosage was increased responded within 10 weeks, suggesting dose escalation may benefit some patients. Approximately one third of patients unresponsive to initial treatment with fluoxetine 20 mg responded to this fixed dosage within another 10 weeks. Fluoxetine 20-60 mg/day was well tolerated.