Lithium plus antipsychotics or anticonvulsants for bipolar disorder: Comparing clinical response and metabolic changes.

OBJECTIVE: Patients with bipolar disorder treated with lithium often require additional antipsychotics or anticonvulsants. However, the comparative effectiveness and safety of these agents as add-on to lithium has not been studied. METHODS: This secondary analysis combined two similar 24-week trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder randomized to lithium (target serum level 0.4-0.6 mEq/L). Guideline-based adjunctive antipsychotics (Li+AP) and anticonvulsants (Li+AC) could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Response was measured on the Clinical Global Impression scale and we performed adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses. Analysis of variance tests compared metabolic measures including a binary diagnosis of metabolic syndrome before and after 24 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: Among 379 outpatients (57% female, mean age 38 years, mean Clinical Global Impression 4.4), users of Li+AP (N = 50, primarily quetiapine and aripiprazole) improved to a similar degree (mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.6, standard deviation = 1.5) as those using lithium-only (i.e. without adjunctive antipsychotics or anticonvulsants, N = 149, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.7, standard deviation = 1.4) (p = 0.59). Users of Li+AC (N = 107, primarily lamotrigine and valproate, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.2, standard deviation = 1.3) and users of Li+AP+AC (N = 73, mean Clinical Global Impression improvement = 1.1, standard deviation = 1.3) showed worse response compared to lithium-only users (all p < 0.01). When comparing Li+AP to Li+AC, users of Li+AP improved slightly better on general (p = 0.05) and manic symptoms (p = 0.01), but showed a worse development of glucose, triglycerides, and metabolic syndrome. CONCLUSION: Despite treatment-by-indication confounding, these findings are relevant for real-world treatment settings and emphasize the need for randomized trials on this clinically important topic.

Insulin receptor substrate in brain-enriched exosomes in subjects with major depression: on the path of creation of biosignatures of central insulin resistance.

Insulin signaling is critical for neuroplasticity, cerebral metabolism as well as for systemic energy metabolism. In rodent studies, impaired brain insulin signaling with resultant insulin resistance (IR) modulates synaptic plasticity and the corresponding behavioral functions. Despite discoveries of central actions of insulin, in vivo molecular mechanisms of brain IR until recently have proven difficult to study in the human brain. In the current study, we leveraged recent technological advances in molecular biology and herein report an increased number of exosomes enriched for L1CAM, a marker predominantly expressed in the brain, in subjects with major depressive disorder (MDD) as compared with age- and sex-matched healthy controls (HC). We also report increased concentration of the insulin receptor substrate-1 (IRS-1) in L1CAM+ exosomes in subjects with MDD as compared with age- and sex-matched HC. We found a relationship between expression of IRS-1 in L1CAM+ exosomes and systemic IR as assessed by homeostatic model assessment of IR in HC, but not in subjects with MDD. The increased IRS-1 levels in L1CAM+ exosomes were greater in subjects with MDD and were associated with suicidality and anhedonia. Finally, our data suggested sex differences in serine-312 phosphorylation of IRS-1 in L1CAM+ exosomes in subjects with MDD. These findings provide a starting point for creating mechanistic framework of brain IR in further development of personalized medicine strategies to effectively treat MDD.

Childhood trauma and treatment outcomes during mood-stabilising treatment with lithium or quetiapine among outpatients with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Childhood trauma affects the course of mood disorders. Researchers are now considering childhood trauma as an influential factor in the treatment of mood disorders. However, the role of childhood trauma in the treatment of bipolar disorder remains understudied. METHODS: The effect of childhood trauma on treatment outcomes was evaluated among participants randomised to treatment with lithium or quetiapine in the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE) study by clinician assessment. Mixed effects linear regression models were used to analyse rates of improvement in symptom severity (assessed with the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale and the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder) and functional impairment (assessed with the Longitudinal Interval Follow-up Evaluation-Range of Impaired Functioning Tool). RESULTS: A history of any childhood trauma was reported by 52.7% of the sample (N = 476). Although participants with a history of any childhood trauma presented with greater symptom severity and functional impairment at most study visits, participants with and without a history of any childhood trauma showed similar rates of improvement in symptom severity and functional impairment over the 24 weeks of treatment. CONCLUSION: This is the first study to explore the association between childhood trauma and treatment outcomes during treatment with lithium or quetiapine in the context of a randomised trial. In Bipolar CHOICE, a history of childhood trauma did not inhibit improvement in symptom severity or functional impairment. Nevertheless, these findings need replication across different settings.

Adjunctive antidepressant treatment among 763 outpatients with bipolar disorder: Findings from the Bipolar CHOICE and LiTMUS trials.

BACKGROUND: Adjunctive antidepressants are frequently used for bipolar depression but their clinical efficacy has been studied in few trials and little is known about how co-occurring manic symptoms affect treatment response. METHODS: Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (N = 482) and Lithium Treatment Moderate-Dose Use Study (N = 281) were similar comparative effectiveness trials on outpatients with bipolar disorder comparing four different randomized treatment arms with adjunctive personalized guideline-based treatment for 24 weeks. Adjunctive antidepressant treatment could be used if clinically indicated and was assessed at every study visit. Adjusted mixed effects linear regression analyses compared users of antidepressants to nonusers overall and in different subcohorts. RESULTS: Of the 763 patients, 282 (37.0%) used antidepressant drugs during the study. Antidepressant users had less improvement compared to nonusers on the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder and on measures of depression. This was particularly true among patients with co-occurring manic symptoms. Exclusion of individuals begun on antidepressants late in the study (potentially due to overall worse response) resulted in no differences between users and nonusers. We found no differences in treatment effects on mania scales. CONCLUSIONS: In this large cohort of outpatients with bipolar disorder, clinically indicated and guideline-based adjunctive antidepressant treatment was not associated with lower depressive symptoms or higher mania symptoms. The treatment-by-indication confounding due to the nonrandomized design of the trials complicates causal interpretations, but no analyses indicated better treatment effects of adjunctive antidepressants.

Acetyl-l-carnitine deficiency in patients with major depressive disorder.

The lack of biomarkers to identify target populations greatly limits the promise of precision medicine for major depressive disorder (MDD), a primary cause of ill health and disability. The endogenously produced molecule acetyl-l-carnitine (LAC) is critical for hippocampal function and several behavioral domains. In rodents with depressive-like traits, LAC levels are markedly decreased and signal abnormal hippocampal glutamatergic function and dendritic plasticity. LAC supplementation induces rapid and lasting antidepressant-like effects via epigenetic mechanisms of histone acetylation. This mechanistic model led us to evaluate LAC levels in humans. We found that LAC levels, and not those of free carnitine, were decreased in patients with MDD compared with age- and sex-matched healthy controls in two independent study centers. Secondary exploratory analyses showed that the degree of LAC deficiency reflected both the severity and age of onset of MDD. Moreover, these analyses showed that the decrease in LAC was larger in patients with a history of treatment-resistant depression (TRD), among whom childhood trauma and, specifically, a history of emotional neglect and being female, predicted the decreased LAC. These findings suggest that LAC may serve as a candidate biomarker to help diagnose a clinical endophenotype of MDD characterized by decreased LAC, greater severity, and earlier onset as well as a history of childhood trauma in patients with TRD. Together with studies in rodents, these translational findings support further exploration of LAC as a therapeutic target that may help to define individualized treatments in biologically based depression subtype consistent with the spirit of precision medicine.

Impact of duloxetine on male fertility: A randomised controlled clinical trial.

This study assessed the impact of duloxetine (serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor) on semen parameters, sperm DNA fragmentation and serum hormones. We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised clinical trial of duloxetine 60mg or placebo daily for 6 weeks (5 weeks full dose and 1 week taper). The primary outcome was the proportion of men with abnormal DNA fragmentation during and after duloxetine administration. Secondary outcomes were changes in semen parameters and hormones on treatment (2 and 6 weeks) and after discontinuation (8 and 10 weeks). Sixty-eight healthy males aged 18-65 were included. Duloxetine was not associated with an increase in the proportion of participants with abnormal sperm DNA fragmentation terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase dUTP nick-end labelling scores (>25%) on treatment (p = 0.09) or after treatment (p = 0.56), nor did median sperm DNA fragmentation increase on treatment. Compared with placebo, there were no changes in bulk semen parameters during treatment. Limited changes in hormonal values were detected. This first published human study of a serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor on male fertility revealed no clinically meaningful effects on sperm DNA fragmentation, semen parameters or serum hormones. Duloxetine, and possibly other serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, may be considered for men desiring fertility who require antidepressant treatment.

Patterns of changes in bipolar depressive symptoms revealed by trajectory analysis among 482 patients with bipolar disorder.

INTRODUCTION: Depressive episodes are often prevalent among patients with bipolar disorder, but little is known regarding the differential patterns of development over time. We aimed to determine and characterize trajectories of depressive symptoms among adults with bipolar disorder during 6 months of systematic treatment. METHODS: The pragmatic clinical trial, Bipolar Clinical Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE), randomized 482 outpatients with bipolar disorder to lithium or quetiapine. Depressive symptoms were rated at up to 9 visits using the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Growth mixture modeling was utilized to identify trajectories and multinomial regression analysis estimated associations with potential predictors. RESULTS: Four distinct trajectories of depressive symptoms were identified. The responding class (60.3%) with a rapid reduction and subsequent low level; the partial-responding class (18.4%) with an initial reduction followed by an increase during the remaining weeks; the fluctuating class (11.6%) with a fluctuation in depressive symptoms; and the non-responding class (9.7%) with sustained moderate-severe depressive symptoms. Bipolar type I predicted membership of the non-responding class and randomization to quetiapine predicted membership of either the responding or the non-responding class. CONCLUSION: Approximately 30% experienced a partial or fluctuating course, and almost 10% had a chronic course with moderate-severe depression during 6 months. Patients diagnosed with bipolar type 1 had higher risk of being categorized into a class with a worse outcome. While no differences in average overall outcomes occurred between the lithium and quetiapine groups, trajectory analysis revealed that the lithium group had more variable courses.

Correlation between white blood cell count and mood-stabilising treatment response in two bipolar disorder trials.

BACKGROUND: Immune system markers may predict affective disorder treatment response, but whether an overall immune system marker predicts bipolar disorder treatment effect is unclear. METHODS: Bipolar CHOICE (N = 482) and LiTMUS (N = 283) were similar comparative effectiveness trials treating patients with bipolar disorder for 24 weeks with four different treatment arms (standard-dose lithium, quetiapine, moderate-dose lithium plus optimised personalised treatment (OPT) and OPT without lithium). We performed secondary mixed effects linear regression analyses adjusted for age, gender, smoking and body mass index to investigate relationships between pre-treatment white blood cell (WBC) levels and clinical global impression scale (CGI) response. RESULTS: Compared to participants with WBC counts of 4.5-10 × 109/l, participants with WBC < 4.5 or WBC ≥ 10 showed similar improvement within each specific treatment arm and in gender-stratified analyses. CONCLUSIONS: An overall immune system marker did not predict differential treatment response to four different treatment approaches for bipolar disorder all lasting 24 weeks.

Cognitive-Behavioral Analysis System of Psychotherapy, Drug, or Their Combination for Persistent Depressive Disorder: Personalizing the Treatment Choice Using Individual Participant Data Network Metaregression.

BACKGROUND: Persistent depressive disorder is prevalent, disabling, and often difficult to treat. The cognitive-behavioral analysis system of psychotherapy (CBASP) is the only psychotherapy specifically developed for its treatment. However, we do not know which of CBASP, antidepressant pharmacotherapy, or their combination is the most efficacious and for which types of patients. This study aims to present personalized prediction models to facilitate shared decision-making in treatment choices to match patients' characteristics and preferences based on individual participant data network metaregression. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive search for randomized controlled trials comparing any two of CBASP, pharmacotherapy, or their combination and sought individual participant data from identified trials. The primary outcomes were reduction in depressive symptom severity for efficacy and dropouts due to any reason for treatment acceptability. RESULTS: All 3 identified studies (1,036 participants) were included in the present analyses. On average, the combination therapy showed significant superiority over both monotherapies in terms of efficacy and acceptability, while the latter 2 treatments showed essentially similar results. Baseline depression, anxiety, prior pharmacotherapy, age, and depression subtypes moderated their relative efficacy, which indicated that for certain subgroups of patients either drug therapy or CBASP alone was a recommendable treatment option that is less costly, may have fewer adverse effects and match an individual patient's preferences. An interactive web app (https://kokoro.med.kyoto-u.ac.jp/CBASP/prediction/) shows the predicted disease course for all possible combinations of patient characteristics. CONCLUSIONS: Individual participant data network metaregression enables treatment recommendations based on individual patient characteristics.

Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression.

OBJECTIVE: Activation encompasses energy and activity and is a central feature of bipolar disorder. However, the impact of activation on treatment response of bipolar depression requires further exploration. The aims of this study were to assess the association of decreased activation and sustained remission in bipolar depression and test for factors that could affect this association. METHODS: We assessed participants with Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th ed) bipolar depression ( n = 303) included in a comparative effectiveness study of lithium- and quetiapine-based treatments (the Bipolar CHOICE study). Activation was evaluated using items from the Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale. The selection of these items was based on a dimension of energy and interest symptoms associated with poorer treatment response in major depression. RESULTS: Decreased activation was associated with lower remission rates in the raw analyses and in a logistic regression model adjusted for baseline severity and subsyndromal manic symptoms (odds ratio = 0.899; p = 0.015). The manic features also predicted lower remission (odds ratio = 0.934; p < 0.001). Remission rates were similar in the two treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Decreased activation and subsyndromal manic symptoms predict lower remission rates in bipolar depression. Patients with these features may require specific treatment approaches, but new studies are necessary to identify treatments that could improve outcomes in this population.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol do not affect 6-month mood-stabilizing treatment outcome among 482 patients with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Many mood disorder patients need analgesics due to increased pain sensitivity. Recent studies have suggested that nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) may inhibit antidepressant treatment, which requires replication before clinical recommendations. METHODS: The Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder Study randomized participants to 6 months lithium or quetiapine treatment. Use of NSAIDs and paracetamol was assessed throughout the study period and psychopathology measured with the Clinical Global Impression Scale for Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP) and Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale (BISS). The effects of NSAIDs and paracetamol on treatment outcome were examined using mixed effects linear regression adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, smoking status, exercise, and somatic diseases. RESULTS: Among 482 participants, 177 (36.7%) used NSAIDs and/or paracetamol during the study. NSAID and paracetamol users did not differ from nonusers with respect to treatment outcome with lithium or quetiapine at any time point during 6 months treatment on the overall CGI-BP (ß = 0.001 (95% CI = -0.01 to -0.01), P = .87), the BISS (ß = 0.01 (95% CI = -0.17 to 0.15), P = .91), nor the CGI-BP subscales for depression or mania. Users of NSAIDs only (n = 76), paracetamol only (n = 62), and users of both NSAIDs and paracetamol (n = 39) showed no statistical difference compared to nonusers (all P > .3). CONCLUSIONS: This is the first trial to show that use of NSAIDs and paracetamol, alone or in combination, does not affect lithium- or quetiapine-based bipolar disorder mood-stabilizing treatment outcomes. Prior studies have suggested that NSAIDs may inhibit antidepressant treatment, whereas our results support findings indicating no detrimental effects of NSAIDs or paracetamol on affective disorder treatment.

White blood cell count correlates with mood symptom severity and specific mood symptoms in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: Immune alterations may play a role in bipolar disorder etiology; however, the relationship between overall immune system functioning and mood symptom severity is unknown. METHODS: The two comparative effectiveness trials, the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiatives in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder Study (Bipolar CHOICE) and the Lithium Treatment Moderate-Dose Use Study (LiTMUS), were similar trials among patients with bipolar disorder. At study entry, white blood cell count and bipolar mood symptom severity (via Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale and Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale) were assessed. We performed analysis of variance and linear regression analyses to investigate relationships between deviations from median white blood cell and multinomial regression analysis between higher and lower white blood cell levels. All analyses were adjusted for age, gender, body mass index, smoking, diabetes, hypertension and hyperlipidemia. RESULTS: Among 482 Bipolar CHOICE participants, for each 1.0 × 109/L white blood cell deviation, the overall Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale severity increased significantly among men (coefficient = 2.13; 95% confidence interval = [0.46, -3.79]; p = 0.013), but not among women (coefficient = 0.87; 95% confidence interval = [-0.87, -2.61]; p = 0.33). Interaction analyses showed a trend toward greater Bipolar Inventory of Symptoms Scale symptom severity among men (coefficient = 1.51; 95% confidence interval = [-0.81, -3.82]; p = 0.2). Among 283 LiTMUS participants, higher deviation from the median white blood cell showed a trend toward higher Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale scores among men (coefficient = 1.33; 95% confidence interval = [-0.22, -2.89]; p = 0.09), but not among women (coefficient = 0.34; 95% confidence interval = [-0.64, -1.32]; p = 0.50). When combining LiTMUS and Bipolar CHOICE, Montgomery-Aasberg Depression Rating Scale scores increased significantly among men (coefficient = 1.09; 95% confidence interval = [0.31, -1.87]; p = 0.006) for each 1.0 × 109/L white blood cell deviation, whereas we found a weak association among women (coefficient = 0.55; 95% confidence interval = [-0.20, -1.29]; p = 0.14). Lower and higher white blood cell levels correlated with greater symptom severity and specific symptoms, varying according to gender. CONCLUSION: Deviations in an overall immune system marker, even within the normal white blood cell range, correlated with mood symptom severity in bipolar disorder, mostly among males. Studies are warranted investigating whether white blood cell count may predict response to mood-stabilizing treatment.

Convergence in patient-therapist therapeutic alliance ratings and its relation to outcome in chronic depression treatment.

OBJECTIVE: This study tested whether discrepancy between patients' and therapists' ratings of the therapeutic alliance, as well as convergence in their alliance ratings over time, predicted outcome in chronic depression treatment. METHOD: Data derived from a controlled trial of partial or non-responders to open-label pharmacotherapy subsequently randomized to 12 weeks of algorithm-driven pharmacotherapy alone or pharmacotherapy plus psychotherapy. The current study focused on the psychotherapy conditions (N = 357). Dyadic multilevel modeling was used to assess alliance discrepancy and alliance convergence over time as predictors of two depression measures: one pharmacotherapist-rated (Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptoms-Clinician; QIDS-C), the other blind interviewer-rated (Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; HAMD). RESULTS: Patients' and therapists' alliance ratings became more similar, or convergent, over the course of psychotherapy. Higher alliance convergence was associated with greater reductions in QIDS-C depression across psychotherapy. Alliance convergence was not significantly associated with declines in HAMD depression; however, greater alliance convergence was related to lower HAMD scores at 3-month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The results partially support the hypothesis that increasing patient-therapist consensus on alliance quality during psychotherapy may improve treatment and longer term outcomes.

Complexity of illness and adjunctive benzodiazepine use in outpatients with bipolar I or II disorder: results from the Bipolar CHOICE study.

Benzodiazepines are widely prescribed for patients with bipolar disorders in clinical practice, but very little is known about the subtypes of patients with bipolar disorder or aspects of bipolar illness that contribute most to benzodiazepine use. We examined the prevalence of and factors associated with benzodiazepine use among 482 patients with bipolar I or II disorder enrolled in the Bipolar CHOICE study. Eighty-one subjects were prescribed benzodiazepines at study entry and were considered benzodiazepine users. Stepwise logistic regression was used to model baseline benzodiazepine use versus nonuse, using entry and exit criteria of P < 0.1. In bivariate analyses, benzodiazepine users were prescribed a significantly higher number of other psychotropic medications and were more likely to be prescribed lamotrigine or antidepressants as compared with benzodiazepine nonusers. Benzodiazepine users were more likely to have a diagnosis of bipolar I disorder and comorbid anxiety disorder, but not comorbid alcohol or substance use disorders. Benzodiazepine users also had experienced more anxiety and depressive symptoms and suicidality, but not irritability or manic symptoms, than did benzodiazepine nonusers. In the multivariate model, anxiety symptom level (regardless of diagnosis), lamotrigine use, number of concomitant psychotropic medications, college education, and high household income predicted benzodiazepine use. Benzodiazepine use in patients with bipolar disorders is associated with greater illness complexity as indicated by a higher number of concomitant psychotropic medications and higher anxiety symptom burden, regardless of a comorbid anxiety disorder diagnosis. Demographic factors were also important determinants of benzodiazepine use, which may be related to access to care and insurance coverage for benzodiazepines.

Medical burden in bipolar disorder: findings from the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder study (Bipolar CHOICE).

OBJECTIVES: Individuals with bipolar disorder have high rates of other medical comorbidity, which is associated with higher mortality rates and worse course of illness. The present study examined common predictors of medical comorbidity. METHODS: The Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder study (Bipolar CHOICE) enrolled 482 participants with bipolar I or bipolar II disorder in a six-month, randomized comparative effectiveness trial. Baseline assessments included current and lifetime DSM-IV-TR diagnoses, demographic information, psychiatric and medical history, severity of psychiatric symptoms, level of functioning, and a fasting blood draw. Medical comorbidities were categorized into two groups: cardiometabolic (e.g., diabetes, hyperlipidemia, and metabolic syndrome) and non-cardiovascular (e.g., seizures, asthma, and cancer). Additionally, we looked at comorbid substance use (e.g., smoking and drug dependence). RESULTS: We found that 96.3% of participants had at least one other medical comorbidity. Older age predicted a greater likelihood of having a cardiometabolic condition. Early age of onset of bipolar symptoms was associated with a lower chance of having a cardiometabolic condition, but a greater chance of having other types of medical comorbidity. Additional predictors of other medical comorbidities in bipolar disorder included more time spent depressed, less time spent manic/hypomanic, and longer duration of illness. Medications associated with weight gain were associated with low high-density lipoprotein and abnormal triglycerides. CONCLUSIONS: There appears to be a substantial medical burden associated with bipolar disorder, highlighting the need for collaborative care among psychiatric and general medical providers to address both psychiatric and other medical needs concomitantly in this group of patients.

Mediators of sexual functioning and marital quality in chronically depressed adults with and without a history of childhood sexual abuse.

INTRODUCTION: Sexual dysfunction is common among depressed adults. Childhood sexual abuse (CSA) and depressive symptomology are among the risk factors for sexual dysfunction, and these factors may interact to predict adult relationship functioning. Several models have been developed postulating interactions between these variables. AIM: We tested models of the effects of CSA and elucidate the associations between CSA, sexual dysfunction, depression severity, anxiety, and relationship quality in chronically depressed adults. METHODS: Baseline data from 808 chronically depressed outpatients enrolled in the Research Evaluating the Value of Augmenting Medication with Psychotherapy study were evaluated using structural equation modeling. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The Inventory of Depressive Symptomology, self-report version (IDS-SR) assessed depression severity, and the Mood and Anxiety Symptom Questionnaire Anxious Arousal subscale assessed anxiety. Sexual function was assessed with the Arizona Sexual Experiences Scale (ASEX), and the Quality of Marriage Index (QMI) assessed relationship quality for patients in stable relationships. RESULTS: CSA scores predicted depression severity on the IDS-SR, as well as lower relationship quality and sexual satisfaction. ASEX scores were significantly associated with depression severity but were not correlated with the QMI. Two models were evaluated to elucidate these associations, revealing that (i) depression severity and anxious arousal mediated the relationship between CSA and adult sexual function, (ii) anxious arousal and sexual functioning mediated the association between CSA and depression symptoms, and (iii) when these models were combined, anxious arousal emerged as the most important mediator of CSA on depression which, in turn, mediated associations with adult sexual satisfaction and relationship quality. CONCLUSIONS: Although CSA predicts lower relationship and sexual satisfaction among depressed adults, the long-term effects of CSA appear to be mediated by depressive and anxious symptoms. It is important to address depression and anxiety symptoms when treating patients with CSA who present with sexual dysfunction or marital concerns.

Psychotherapy use in bipolar disorder: Association with functioning and illness severity.

OBJECTIVE: This study examines characteristics of individuals with bipolar disorder who sought psychotherapy versus those who did not. METHODS: Bipolar CHOICE was an 11-site comparative effectiveness study of lithium versus quetiapine in symptomatic outpatients (N = 482) with bipolar disorder. At baseline, participants' psychotherapy use within the past 3 months, mood, functioning, and overall health were assessed. Logistic regressions were used to test whether psychotherapy users and non-users differed on various demographic and clinical variables at baseline. Mixed-effects regression was used to determine whether psychotherapy groups differed on response to treatment over the 6-month study. Kaplan-Meier plots and log-rank tests were employed to test whether there were any differences in time to recovery (CGI-BP ≤ 2 for at least 8 weeks) between the groups. RESULTS: Thirty one percent of participants reported using psychotherapy services. Psychotherapy users reported greater medication side effect burden than non-users and were more likely to have moderate to high suicide risk and at least one anxiety disorder. Participants not utilizing medications or psychotherapy had greater mania symptom severity, were younger, and less educated than medication only users. Medication only users were more likely to be married than the other participants. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that a minority of individuals with bipolar disorder attend psychotherapy services, and those that do have greater illness burden.

Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE): a pragmatic trial of complex treatment for a complex disorder.

BACKGROUND: Classic and second-generation antipsychotic mood stabilizers are recommended for treatment of bipolar disorder, yet there are no randomized comparative effectiveness studies that have examined the 'real-world' advantages and disadvantages of these medications. PURPOSE: We describe the strategic decisions in the design of the Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE). This article outlines the key issues and solutions the investigators faced in designing a clinical trial that would maximize generalizability and inform real-world clinical treatment of bipolar disorder. METHODS: Bipolar CHOICE was a 6-month, multi-site, prospective, randomized clinical trial of outpatients with bipolar disorder. This study compares the effectiveness of quetiapine versus lithium, each with adjunctive personalized treatments (APTs). The co-primary outcomes selected are the overall benefits and harms of the study medications (as measured by the Clinical Global Impression-Efficacy Index) and the Necessary Clinical Adjustments (a measure of the number of medication changes). Secondary outcomes are continuous measures of mood, the Framingham General Cardiovascular Risk Score, and the Longitudinal Interval Follow up Evaluation Range of Impaired Functioning Tool (LIFE-RIFT). RESULTS: The final study design consisted of a single-blind, randomized comparative effectiveness trial of quetiapine versus lithium, plus APT, across 10 sites. Other important study considerations included limited exclusion criteria to maximize generalizability, flexible dosing of APT medications to mimic real-world treatment, and an intent-to-treat analysis plan. In all, 482 participants were randomized to the study, and 364 completed the study. LIMITATIONS: The potential limitations of the study include the heterogeneity of APT, selection of study medications, lack of a placebo-control group, and participants' ability to pay for study medications. CONCLUSION: We expect that this study will inform our understanding of the benefits and harms of lithium, a classic mood stabilizer, compared to quetiapine, a second-generation antipsychotic with broad-spectrum activity in bipolar disorder, and will provide an example of a well-designed and well-conducted randomized comparative effectiveness clinical trial.

A proof-of-concept randomized crossover clinical trial of a first-in-class vasopressin 1a receptor antagonist for PTSD: Design, methods, and recruitment.

Background: Almost eight million Americans suffer from Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Current PTSD drug therapies rely on repurposed antidepressants and anxiolytics, which produce undesirable side effects and have recognized compliance issues. Vasopressin represents a promising and novel target for pharmacological intervention. Logistical issues implementing a clinical trial for a novel PTSD pharmaceutical are relatively uncharted territory as trials concerning a new agent have not been published in the past several decades. All published trials have repurposed FDA-approved psychoactive medications with known risk profiles. Our recruitment challenges are discussed in this context. Methods: An 18-week proof-of-concept randomized crossover clinical trial of a first-in-class vasopressin 1a receptor antagonist (SRX246) for PTSD was conducted. All participants received SRX246 for 8 weeks, the placebo for 8 weeks, and the drug vs. placebo arms were compared. Participants were assessed every 2 weeks for PTSD symptoms as well as other medication effects. Results were expected to provide an initial demonstration of safety and tolerability in this clinical population and potentially clinical efficacy in SRX246-treated patients measured by Clinician Administered PTSD Scale (CAPS) score changes, clinical impression, and other indices compared to placebo. The primary hypothesis was that SRX246 would result in a clinically meaningful 10-point reduction in mean CAPS score compared to placebo. Discussion: This study is the first to investigate an oral vasopressin 1a receptor antagonist for PTSD. As a wave of PTSD clinical trials with new pharmaceutical compounds are beginning now, lessons learned from our recruitment challenges may be invaluable to these endeavors.

Patient treatment preference as a predictor of response and attrition in treatment for chronic depression.

BACKGROUND: Findings regarding the relationship between patient treatment preference and treatment outcome are mixed. This is a secondary data analysis investigating the relationship between treatment preference, and symptom outcome and attrition in a large two-phase depression treatment trial. METHODS: Patients met DSM-IV criteria for chronic forms of depression. Phase I was a 12-week, nonrandomized, open-label trial in which all participants (n = 785) received antidepressant medication(s) (ADM). Phase I nonremitters were randomized to Phase II, in which they received 12 weeks of either cognitive-behavioral system of psychotherapy (CBASP) + ADM (n = 193), brief supportive psychotherapy (BSP) + ADM (n = 187), or ADM only (n = 93). Participants indicated their treatment preference (medication only, combined treatment or no preference) at study entry. Symptoms were measured at 2-week intervals with the 24-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D). RESULTS: A large majority of patients reported a preference for combined treatment. Patients who preferred medication only were more likely to endorse a chemical imbalance explanation for depression, whereas those desiring combined treatment were more likely to attribute their depression to stressful experiences. In Phase I, patients who expressed no treatment preference showed greater rates of HAM-D symptom reduction than those with any preference, and patients with a preference for medication showed higher attrition than those preferring combined treatment. In Phase II, baseline treatment preference was not associated with symptom reduction or attrition. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment preferences may moderate treatment response and attrition in unexpected ways. Research identifying factors associated with differing preferences may enable improved treatment retention and response.