The 24-month course of manic symptoms in children.

OBJECTIVES: The Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study was designed to investigate phenomenology and establish predictors of functional outcomes in children with elevated manic symptoms. The purpose of this series of analyses was to determine whether the participants demonstrated different trajectories of parent-reported manic and biphasic symptoms over the first 24 months of follow-up and to describe the clinical characteristics of the trajectories. METHODS: The 707 participants were initially aged 6-12 years and ascertained from outpatient clinics associated with the four university-affiliated LAMS sites. There were 621 children whose parents/guardians' ratings scored ≥ 12 on the Parent General Behavior Inventory-10-item Mania Form (PGBI-10M) and a matched random sample of 86 children whose parents/guardians' ratings scored ≤ 11 on the PGBI-10M. Participants were seen every six months after the baseline and their parents completed the PGBI-10M at each visit. RESULTS: For the whole sample, manic symptoms decreased over 24 months (linear effect B = -1.15, standard error = 0.32, t = -3.66, p < 0.001). Growth mixture modeling revealed four unique trajectories of manic symptoms. Approximately 85% of the cohort belonged to two classes in which manic symptoms decreased. The remaining ~15% formed two classes (high and rising and unstable) characterized by the highest rates of diagnostic conversion to a bipolar disorder (all p-values < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Outcomes are not uniform among children with symptoms of mania or at high risk for mania. A substantial minority of clinically referred children shows unstable or steadily increasing manic symptoms, and these patterns have distinct clinical correlates.

Age differences in the phenomenology of pediatric bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: The primary purpose of this study was to explore whether age differences in the phenomenology of bipolar disorders from 4 to 17 years of age exist. METHODS: Outcome measures included questionnaires pertaining to mood symptoms, psychosocial functioning, and family history of psychiatric illness. Phenomenology was examined in two diagnostic groups: syndromal bipolar disorder (bipolar I or II) and subsyndromal bipolar disorder (bipolar disorder not otherwise specified or cyclothymia) and across six age cohorts: 4-6, 7-8, 9-10, 11-13, and 14-17 years. Analyses examined linear and non-linear age effects on clinician-rated measures of mood and psychosocial functioning. RESULTS: Participants were 535 outpatients (339 males) ages 4-17 years. The proportion diagnosed with comorbid ADHD was significantly lower in the oldest age group. Age groups showed significant moderate decreases in motor activity, aggression, and irritability with age. Many symptoms of depression showed significant increases with age. BP I cases showed much higher manic symptoms, and BP I and BP II cases indicated slightly to moderately higher depressive symptoms, compared to subsyndromal cases. These patterns held after adjusting for comorbid ADHD, and age did not interact with syndrome status. There were also age differences in total scores for measures of mood symptoms and psychosocial functioning. LIMITATIONS: Mood ratings were completed based on the same interview that informed the research diagnoses. Also, mood episode at time of interview was not captured. CONCLUSIONS: These findings affirm the existence of bipolar disorder from pre-school children through adolescence, with a similar clinical presentation across a wide developmental age span.

An update on antidepressant use and suicidality in pediatric depression.

INTRODUCTION: In 2003, public health advisories in North America and Europe regarding suicidality associated with selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) led to the addition of black box warnings to antidepressant package inserts in 2004. Subsequently, a series of events appeared to result from these regulatory actions. AREAS COVERED: This review provides an overview of the temporal associations of regulatory agencies' actions in North America and Europe with rates of depression diagnoses, pediatric antidepressant prescription rates, follow-up visits to physicians prescribing antidepressants, and rates of completed suicide and suicidal ideation in children and adolescents. In addition, evidence-based predictors of suicidal behavior and suicide risk, as provided by large, multisite studies of depressed children and adolescents, are outlined. Finally, this review considers key advancements in the study of young patients at risk for suicide and describes innovations in current research methodology, to more accurately identify suicidality and the relationship to antidepressant use within this vulnerable patient population. EXPERT OPINION: Evaluating the role of antidepressants in those youths who do not respond to evidence-based psychotherapeutic interventions may be a useful future research direction. Until more data are available, however, closely monitored antidepressant treatment in combination with CBT may provide the most benefit.

Moderators of fluoxetine treatment response for children and adolescents with comorbid depression and substance use disorders.

Our recent 8-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of fluoxetine in adolescents (ages 12-17 years) with comorbid depression and substance use disorder (SUD) did not detect a significant antidepressant treatment effect. The purpose of this secondary analysis was to explore moderators of the effect of fluoxetine in this sample. Static moderators measured at baseline were depression chronicity and hopelessness severity; time-varying moderators measured at baseline and weekly during the 8-week trial period were alcohol and marijuana use severity. Treatment effects on depression outcomes were examined among moderating subgroups in random effects regression models. Subjects assigned to fluoxetine treatment with chronic depression at baseline (p = .04) or no more than moderate alcohol use during the trial (p = .04) showed significantly greater decline in depression symptoms in comparison to placebo-assigned subgroups. The current analysis suggests that youth with chronic depression and no more than moderate alcohol consumption are likely to respond better to treatment with fluoxetine compared with placebo than youth with transient depression and heavy alcohol use.

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled long-term maintenance study of aripiprazole in children with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluates the long-term efficacy of aripiprazole compared to placebo in children with bipolar disorders. METHOD: Outpatients aged 4 to 9 years meeting DSM-IV criteria for a bipolar disorder (I, II, not otherwise specified, cyclothymia) were eligible to receive up to 16 weeks of open-label treatment with aripiprazole (phase 1). Patients were randomized into the 72-week double-blind phase of the study once they met a priori response criteria for stabilization (phase 2). During phase 2, patients either remained on their current aripiprazole regimen or began a double-blind taper with aripiprazole discontinued and switched to placebo. The primary outcome measure for phase 2 was time to discontinuation due to a mood event. RESULTS: Patients were recruited between May 2004 and November 2008. Following phase 1, in which 96 patients received aripiprazole, 30 patients (mean age = 7.1 years) were randomly assigned to continue aripiprazole and 30 patients (mean age = 6.7 years) were randomly assigned to placebo. The mean (SD) dose of aripiprazole prior to randomization for these patients was 6.4 (2.1) mg/d. Patients randomly assigned to aripiprazole were enrolled significantly longer until time to study discontinuation due to a mood event (6.14 median weeks, SE ± 11.88 weeks; P = .005) and discontinuation for any reason (including mood events) (4.00 median weeks, SE ± 3.91 weeks; P = .003) than those randomly assigned to placebo (mood event, 2.29 median weeks, SE ± 0.38 weeks; any reason, 2.00 median weeks, SE ± 0.31 weeks). Regardless of random assignment, both the aripiprazole and placebo groups showed substantial rates of withdrawal from maintenance treatment over the initial 4 weeks (15/30 [50%] for aripiprazole; 27/30 [90%] for placebo), suggesting a possible nocebo effect (ie, knowledge of possibly switching from active medication to placebo increasing concern about relapse). The most frequently reported adverse events during double-blind aripiprazole therapy included stomach pain (n = 10, 33%), increased appetite (n = 9, 30%), and headaches (n = 9, 30%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the possibility of a nocebo effect, these results suggest that aripiprazole may be superior to placebo in the long-term treatment of pediatric patients following stabilization with open-label aripiprazole. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00194077.

An open-label study of aripiprazole in children with a bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this open-label study was to describe the effectiveness of aripiprazole (APZ) in the treatment of children with bipolar disorders suffering from manic symptomatology. METHOD: Symptomatic outpatients (Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] score ≥15) meeting strict, unmodified, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, diagnostic symptom criteria for a bipolar disorder, ages 4-9 years, were eligible. Subjects were treated prospectively with flexible doses of APZ (maximum daily dose of 15 mg/day), for up to 16 weeks or until a priori response criteria were met. Outcome measures included the YMRS, Clinical Global Impressions Scale-Severity, Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS), and the Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R). A priori response criteria consisted of 3 of 4 consecutive weeks with (1) CDRS-R <29; (2) YMRS <10; and (3) CGAS >50. RESULTS: Ninety-six children (62 males; mean age of 6.9 (SD = 1.7), received APZ for an average length of treatment of 12.5 (SD = 3.9) weeks. Significant improvements in YMRS, CDRS-R, CGAS, and Clinical Global Impressions Scale-Severity scores (p < 0.001) were noted at the end of study participation. Sixty of the subjects (62.5%) met a priori response criteria at study's end. The most common side effects noted were stomachache, increased appetite, and headache. Two subjects were removed from the study due to side effects [epistaxis (n = 1); akathisia (n = 1)]. Subjects experienced an average weight gain of 2.4 (SD = 1.9) kg. CONCLUSION: APZ may be effective in the acute treatment of symptoms of children with bipolar illnesses.

Clinical characteristics of children receiving antipsychotic medication.

This study explored the demographic and diagnostic features of children who were currently receiving antipsychotics compared to children who were receiving other psychotropics in a cohort of children with and without elevated symptoms of mania (ESM). Participants were recruited from 10 child outpatient mental health clinics associated with four universities. Guardians with children between 6-12 years who presented for new clinical evaluations completed the Parent General Behavior Inventory-10 Item Mania Scale (PGBI-10M). All children who scored ≥12 on the PGBI-10M and a select demographically matched comparison group of patients who scored ≤11 were invited to participate. Children were divided into two groups: those receiving at least one antipsychotic medication and those receiving other psychotropic medications. The groups were compared on demographics, diagnoses, psychiatric symptoms, functioning, and past hospitalizations. Of the 707 children enrolled in the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study, 443 (63%) were prescribed psychotropic medication at baseline: 157 (35%) were receiving an antipsychotic and 286 (65%) were prescribed other agents. Multivariate results indicated that being prescribed antipsychotics was related to being white, previous hospitalization, having a psychotic or bipolar 1 disorder and the site where the child was receiving services (p<0.001). In this sample, it is relatively common for a child to be prescribed an antipsychotic medication. However, the only diagnoses associated with a greater likelihood of being treated with an antipsychotic were psychotic disorders or unmodified DSM-IV bipolar 1 disorder.

Relationship of persistent manic symptoms to the diagnosis of pediatric bipolar spectrum disorders.

OBJECTIVE: The diagnosis of bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSDs [bipolar I and II disorders, cyclothymic disorder, and bipolar disorder not otherwise specified]) in youth remains controversial. The present study evaluated the possibility that the presence of persistent manic symptoms over a relatively short interval may increase the probability of a BPSD DSM diagnosis. METHOD: Data were obtained from the screening and baseline assessments collected from 2005 through 2008 of an ongoing prospective, longitudinal study (Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms) examining the diagnosis and phenomenology of youth (N = 692) presenting to outpatient centers at ages 6-12 years. Youth were assessed for elevated symptoms of mania (ESM) with the Parent General Behavior Inventory-10-Item Mania Scale (PGBI-10M), the primary outcome measure. Screening and baseline scores separated individuals into those with ESM (ESM+; PGBI-10M score ≥ 12) and a control group of youth without ESM (ESM-; PGBI-10M score < 12). Youth were classified into 4 groups: persistent ESM+, remitted ESM+, persistent ESM-, and progressed to ESM+. RESULTS: Individuals with persistent ESM+ were more likely to have a BPSD (relative risk = 3.04; 95% CI, 2.15-4.30). Using 2 administrations of the PGBI-10M spaced over a relatively brief interval (median = 4.0, mean = 6.1, SD = 5.9 weeks) improved the prediction of BPSD over using only the first administration (ΔR(2) = 0.10, Δχ(2)(1) = 50.06, P < .001). Likelihood ratios indicated that persistent ESM- substantially decreased the probability of BPSD. While high levels of persistent ESM+ increased the probability of a BPSD diagnosis, the final positive predictive value was only sufficient to signify the need for more thorough clinical evaluation. CONCLUSIONS: In many cases, obtaining repeated parent report of mania symptoms substantially altered the probability of a BPSD diagnosis and may be a useful adjunct to a careful clinical evaluation. Future waves of data collection from this longitudinal study will be crucial for devising clinically useful methods for identifying or ruling out pediatric BPSD.

Characteristics of children with elevated symptoms of mania: the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study is to examine differences in psychiatric symptomatology, diagnoses, demographics, functioning, and psychotropic medication exposure in children with elevated symptoms of mania (ESM) compared to youth without ESM. This article describes the initial demographic information, diagnostic and symptom prevalence, and medication exposure for the LAMS cohort that will be followed longitudinally. METHOD: Guardians of consecutively ascertained new outpatients 6 to 12 years of age presenting for treatment at one of 10 university-affiliated mental health centers were asked to complete the Parent General Behavior Inventory-10-Item Mania Scale (PGBI-10M). Patients with scores ≥ 12 on the PGBI-10M (ESM+) and a matched sample of patients who screened negative (ESM-) were invited to participate. Patients were enrolled from December 13, 2005, to December 18, 2008. RESULTS: 707 children (621 ESM+, 86 ESM-; mean [SD] age = 9.4 [2.0] years) were evaluated. The ESM+ group, compared to the ESM- group, more frequently met DSM-IV criteria for a mood disorder (P < .001), bipolar spectrum disorders (BPSD; P < .001), and disruptive behavior disorders (P < .01). Furthermore, they showed poorer overall functioning and more severe manic, depressive, attention-deficit/hyperactivity, disruptive behavioral, and anxiety symptoms. Nevertheless, rates of BPSD were relatively low in the ESM+ group (25%), with almost half of these BPSD patients (12.1% of ESM+ patients) meeting DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder not otherwise specified. ESM+ children with BPSD had significantly more of the following: current prescriptions for antipsychotics, mood stabilizers, and anticonvulsants (P < .001 for each); psychiatric hospitalizations (P < .001); and biological parents with elevated mood (P = .001 for mothers, P < .013 for fathers). ESM+ children with BPSD were also lower functioning compared to ESM+ children without BPSD. CONCLUSIONS: Although ESM+ was associated with higher rates of BPSD than ESM-, 75% of ESM+ children did not meet criteria for BPSD. Results suggest that longitudinal assessment is needed to examine which factors are associated with diagnostic evolution to BPSD in children with elevated symptoms of mania.

Longitudinal Assessment of Manic Symptoms (LAMS) study: background, design, and initial screening results.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the design of a longitudinal study of youth with elevated symptoms of mania (ESM), as well as the prevalence and correlates of manic symptoms. Bipolar disorder in youth is serious and is surrounded by controversy about its phenomenology, course, and treatment. Yet, there are no longitudinal studies of youth selected only for ESM, the phenomenological hallmark. The study's objective is to document the rate and sociodemographic correlates of ESM in children attending outpatient psychiatric clinics. METHOD: Parents of 3,329 children aged 6-12 years visiting 10 outpatient clinics were asked to complete the Parent General Behavior Inventory 10-Item Mania Scale (PGBI-10M). Children with PGBI-10M scores ≥ 12 (ESM positive-screen [ESM+]) and a matched sample of ESM screen-negative (ESM-) children were invited to enroll in the longitudinal study. The sample was accrued from November 14, 2005, to November 28, 2008. RESULTS: Most of the children whose parents filled out the PGBI-10M (N = 2,622, 78.8%) participated in the study. Nonparticipants were slightly younger (mean age = 9.1 years [SD = 2.0 years] versus 9.4 years [SD = 2.0 years] for participants; t3327 = 4.42, P < .001). Nearly half of the participants (43%) were ESM+; these were more likely to be Latino (4.2% versus 2.5% for ESM-; χ(2)1 = 5.45, P = .02), younger (mean age = 9.3 years [SD = 2.0 years] versus 9.6 years [SD = 1.9 years] for ESM-; t2620 = 3.8, P < .001), and insured by Medicaid (48.4% versus 35.4% for ESM-; χ(2)1 = 45.00, P < .001). There were no sociodemographic differences between those who did versus did not agree to enroll in the longitudinal portion (yes to enrollment: n = 621, 55.2%; no to enrollment: n = 503, 44.8%). Four items best discriminated ESM+ children from ESM- children. Three of the 4 items were not the most commonly endorsed items, but all were indicative of behavioral extremes. CONCLUSIONS: Data suggest that ESM+ is not rare in 6- to 12-year-olds. Children who are ESM+ show behavioral extremes, including rapid mood shifts, compared to ESM- children.

The short-term safety and efficacy of fluoxetine in depressed adolescents with alcohol and cannabis use disorders: a pilot randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this study was to examine whether fluoxetine was superior to placebo in the acute amelioration of depressive symptomatology in adolescents with depressive illness and a comorbid substance use disorder. METHODS: Eligible subjects ages 12-17 years with either a current major depressive disorder (MDD) or a depressive disorder that were also suffering from a comorbid substance-related disorder were randomized to receive either fluoxetine or placebo in this single site, 8-week double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The primary outcome analysis was a random effects mixed model for repeated measurements of Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) scores compared between treatment groups across time. RESULTS: An interim analysis was performed after 34 patients were randomized. Based on the results of a futility analysis, study enrollment was halted. Twenty-nine males and 5 females were randomized to receive fluoxetine (n = 18) or placebo (n = 16). Their mean age was 16.5 (1.1) years. Overall, patients who received fluoxetine and placebo had a reduction in CDRS-R scores. However, there was no significant difference in mean change in CDRS-R total score in those subjects treated with fluoxetine and those who received placebo (treatment difference = 0.19, S.E. = 0.58, F = 0.14, p = .74). Furthermore, there was not a significant difference in rates of positive urine drug toxicology results between treatment groups at any post-randomization visit (F = 0.22, df = 1, p = 0.65). The main limitation of this study is its modest sample size and resulting low statistical power. Other significant limitations to this study include, but are not limited to, the brevity of the trial, high placebo response rate, limited dose range of fluoxetine, and the inclusion of youth who met criteria for depressive disorders other than MDD. CONCLUSION: Fluoxetine was not superior to placebo in alleviating depressive symptoms or in decreasing rates of positive drug screens in the acute treatment of adolescents with depression and a concomitant substance use disorder.

Aripiprazole in children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effectiveness and cognitive effects of aripiprazole (APZ) in children with a primary diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: Youths, ages 8-12 years, with a diagnosis of ADHD combined-type or ADHD predominately inattentive-type were enrolled into a 6-week, open-label pilot trial. Outcome measures included the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (ARS-IV), Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI), and Children's Global Assessment Scale (CGAS). The Conners' Continuous Performance Test II, Reading and Math Fluency subscales of the Woodcock-Johnson III Tests of Achievement, and the Stroop Color and Word Test were administered at baseline and end of study. RESULTS: Fourteen (9 males and 5 females) youths were diagnosed with ADHD-combined type, while 9 (5 males and 4 females) were diagnosed with ADHD-inattentive type. At a mean dose of 6.7 mg/day, end of study results showed overall significant improvement from baseline on ADHD and functional outcome measures. No significant differences in baseline performance at end of study were found on the cognitive measures. The most frequently reported adverse events were sedation (n = 18; 78.3%) and headache (n = 11; 47.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Although this was a brief pilot study with a small sample size, in this cohort, APZ led to clinical benefit in reducing ADHD symptoms and improving overall functioning. Of note, cognitive functioning did not appear to be negatively impacted by APZ treatment.

The Collaborative Lithium Trials (CoLT): specific aims, methods, and implementation.

BACKGROUND: Lithium is a benchmark treatment for bipolar illness in adults. However, there has been relatively little methodologically stringent research regarding the use of lithium in youth suffering from bipolarity. METHODS: Under the auspices of the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA), a Written Request (WR) pertaining to the study of lithium in pediatric mania was issued by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) in 2004. Accordingly, the NICHD issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) soliciting submissions to pursue this research. Subsequently, the NICHD awarded a contract to a group of investigators in order to conduct these studies. RESULTS: The Collaborative Lithium Trials (CoLT) investigators, the BPCA-Coordinating Center, and the NICHD developed protocols to provide data that will: (1) establish evidence-based dosing strategies for lithium; (2) characterize the pharmacokinetics and biodisposition of lithium; (3) examine the acute efficacy of lithium in pediatric bipolarity; (4) investigate the long-term effectiveness of lithium treatment; and (5) characterize the short- and long-term safety of lithium. By undertaking two multi-phase trials rather than multiple single-phase studies (as was described in the WR), the feasibility of the research to be undertaken was enhanced while ensuring all the data outlined in the WR would be obtained. The first study consists of: (1) an 8-week open-label, randomized, escalating dose Pharmacokinetic Phase; (2) a 16-week Long-Term Effectiveness Phase; (3) a 28-week double-blind Discontinuation Phase; and (4) an 8-week open-label Restabilization Phase. The second study consists of: (1) an 8-week, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled Efficacy Phase; (2) an open-label Long-Term Effectiveness lasting either 16 or 24 weeks (depending upon blinded treatment assignment during the Efficacy Phase); (3) a 28-week double-blind Discontinuation Phase; and (4) an 8-week open-label Restabilization Phase. In December of 2006, enrollment into the first of these studies began across seven sites. CONCLUSION: These innovative studies will not only provide data to inform the labeling of lithium in children and adolescents with bipolar disorder, but will also enhance clinical decision-making regarding the use of lithium treatment in pediatric bipolar illness. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00442039.

Current research in child and adolescent bipolar disorder.

Although recently more research has considered children with bipolar disorder than in the past, much controversy still surrounds the validity of the diagnosis. Furthermore, questions remain as to whether or not childhood expressions of bipolarity are continuous with adult manifestations of the illness. In order to advance current knowledge of bipolar disorders in children, researchers have begun to conduct phenomenological, longitudinal, treatment, and neuroimaging studies in youths who exhibit symptoms of bipolar illness, as well as offspring of parents with bipolar disorders. Regardless of the differences between research groups regarding how bipolar disorder in children is defined, it is agreed that pediatric bipolarity is a serious and pernicious illness. With early intervention during the period of time in which youths are exhibiting subsyndromal symptoms of pediatric bipolarity, it appears that the progression of the illness to the more malignant manifestation of the disorder may be avoided. This paper will review what is currently known and what still is left to learn about clinically salient topics that pertain to bipolar disorder in children and adolescents.

Initiation of stimulant and antidepressant medication and clinical presentation in juvenile bipolar I disorder.

OBJECTIVES: The primary purpose of this study was to examine the extent to which the initiation of stimulant and antidepressant medication was associated with the subsequent onset of juvenile bipolar I disorder (BP I). Another aim was to investigate differences in clinical presentation between youths prescribed stimulant or antidepressant medication before and after the onset of juvenile BP I disorder. METHODS: Youths between the ages of 5 and 17 years meeting full, unmodified DSM-IV diagnostic symptom criteria for BP were included in this study. Data regarding the age of onset of BP I, psychiatric comorbidities, and current symptoms of mania and depression were obtained. Medication history was recorded as part of the assessment interview with parents and youths. RESULTS: Of the 245 youths with BP I, 65% (n = 160) were treated with stimulant medication; 32% (56/173) were treated after the onset of BP I, and 19% (32/173) were treated before the onset of BP I. Forty-six percent (113/245) were treated with antidepressant medication; 33% (67/206) were treated after the onset of BP I, and 3% (7/206) were treated before the onset of BP I. Patients who were treated with stimulants after the onset of BP I were significantly more likely to be younger (p < 0.0001). Patients who were treated with antidepressants before the onset of BP I were significantly more likely to be older and to have lower levels of mania on the Young Mania Rating Scale at assessment (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Data from this retrospective case series do not support the association between initial stimulant or antidepressant use and the onset of BP I or presenting symptoms of depression or manic symptoms.

Methylphenidate in the treatment of children and adolescents with bipolar disorder and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the short-term efficacy of methylphenidate in the treatment of youths with bipolar disorder (BD) and comorbid attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHOD: A 4-week double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in youths ages 5 to 17 years was conducted. Subjects met DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder and ADHD, were currently receiving a stable dose of at least one thymoleptic, and while euthymic continued to have clinically significant symptoms of ADHD. Patients received 1 week each of placebo, methylphenidate 5 mg twice daily, methylphenidate 10 mg twice daily, and methylphenidate 15 mg twice daily using a crossover design. Subjects were randomly assigned to receive one of six possible dosing orders. At study's end, and before the blind being broken, a "best dose week" for each subject was determined. The primary outcome measure was the total score on the parent-completed ADHD Rating Scale-IV. RESULTS: Sixteen patients, with a mean age of 10.43 (SD 3.14) years completed the trial. Lower scores during best dose treatment compared to the week of placebo treatment were found on the ADHD Rating Scale-IV (p < .05), suggesting a therapeutic benefit. A large effect size (Cohen's d = 0.90) was found for methylphenidate. Treatment was generally well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Euthymic youths with bipolar disorder and ADHD may benefit from short-term concomitant treatment with methylphenidate.

Venlafaxine in the treatment of children and adolescents with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this pilot study were to explore the changes in symptom severity, tolerability, and the pharmacodynamics of venlafaxine treatment in youths with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). METHODS: This was a 2-week, open-label, outpatient trial of venlafaxine in children and adolescents, ages 5-17 years, with ADHD. Three dosing strata, 0.5, 1.0, and 2.0 mg/kg per day, were examined. ADHD symptom severity and improvement assessments included the ADHD Rating Scale (ARS-IV) and the Clinical Global Impressions Scale (CGI). During this study, venlafaxine, O-desmethylvenlafaxine (ODV), norepinephrine, and serotonin concentrations were obtained. RESULTS: Thirty-eight participants (33 males) were treated in this trial. Overall, parent-completed and teacher-completed ARS-IV total scores showed a statistically significant positive change at the end of the study when compared to baseline (p < 0.05). Significant increases in plasma venlafaxine concentrations were observed at day 15 when compared to day 8 (p = 0.04). In addition, plasma norepinephrine and serotonin concentrations were found to be significantly decreased from baseline at end of study (p < 0.05). Four patients ended participation in the study prematurely: lost to follow up (n = 2), withdrawal of consent (n = 1), and worsening of ADHD symptoms after 8 days of treatment (n = 1). There were no discontinuations due to other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Venlafaxine appeared to offer some benefit and appears to be relatively safe for the short-term treatment of ADHD in this open-label trial. The pharmacodynamics of venlafaxine in youths are consistent with serotonergic and neuradrenergic modulation.

Adherence to pharmacological treatment for juvenile bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to describe the prevalence and correlates of adherence to divalproex sodium (DVPX) and lithium carbonate (Li) combination treatment during the initial stabilization treatment phase. METHOD: Adherence to Li/DVPX combination therapy was measured by the presence or absence of minimum serum concentrations of DVPX (50 microg/mL) or Li (0.6 mmol/L). Secondary measures included pill count, patient/parent report, and clinical judgment. Correlates of adherence, including patient characteristics, medication side effects, and family variables, were evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred seven patients (70 males and 37 females) were studied. The proportion of serum concentrations in the therapeutic range across the study period was 0.84 for DVPX and 0.66 for Li. Maternal (r = -0.31; p<.01) and paternal (r = -0.44; p < .01) hospitalization for a psychiatric disorder and less adaptive family functioning (r=-0.26; p < .05) related to treatment nonadherence for DVPX. Better treatment adherence to DVPX (r = 0.21; p < .05) and Li (r = 0.23; p < .05) was associated with a greater number of side effects, whereas male sex was associated with worse adherence to both DVPX (r= -0.24; p < .05) and Li (r = -0.22; p < .05) pharmacotherapy. Clinical response to treatment correlated with adherence to DVPX treatment (r = 0.33; p < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Nonadherence may limit the statistical power of treatment efficacy studies and the effectiveness of pharmacotherapy treatment for juvenile BPD and necessitate strategies to evaluate and enhance levels of treatment adherence.

Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of divalproex monotherapy in the treatment of symptomatic youth at high risk for developing bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if divalproex sodium was superior to placebo in the treatment of symptomatic youths who suffer from a bipolar spectrum disorder and who also have a parent with a diagnosis of a bipolar illness. METHOD: Youths, ages 5 to 17 years, meeting DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (NOS) or cyclothymia who also had at least 1 biological parent with bipolar illness were randomly assigned in a double-blind fashion to receive treatment with either dival-proex sodium or placebo for up to 5 years. Study participation ended if the subject required additional clinical intervention, if the patient developed treatment-related adverse events, or if the participant was not adherent with study procedures. The primary outcome measure was time to study discontinuation for any reason. The study was conducted from August 1997 to April 2003. RESULTS: Fifty-six youths with a mean (SD) age of 10.7 (3.1) years were randomly assigned and received either divalproex sodium (N = 29) or placebo (N = 27). In spite of statistical power of 80% to detect hazard ratios of 2.2 or larger, the treatment groups did not significantly differ in survival time for discontinuation for any reason (p = .93) or discontinuation due to a mood event (p = .55). Changes in mood symptom ratings and psychosocial functioning from baseline to study discontinuation did not differ between groups (most significant p > .14). However, both groups did show improvements in mood symptoms and psychosocial functioning over time (all p values < .002). One patient, from the placebo group, ended study participation due to an adverse event. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that, although well tolerated, divalproex sodium does not produce clinically meaningful improvements in the treatment of symptomatic youths suffering from either bipolar NOS or cyclothymia who are at genetic risk for developing bipolar disorder.

A 26-week open-label study of quetiapine in children with conduct disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to describe the long-term safety and effectiveness of quetiapine in conduct disorder (CD). METHODS: This was an 18-week outpatient follow-up study of an acute trial that enrolled aggressive children ages 6-12 years with a primary diagnosis of CD. To be enrolled into this study, subjects had to have successfully completed participation in the initial 8-week, open-label, outpatient quetiapine trial. Psychometric measures included the Rating of Aggression Against People and/or Property Scale (RAAPP), the Nisonger Child Behavior Rating Form (NCBRF), the Conners' Parent Rating Scale (CPRS-48), the Clinical Global Impressions Scale of Severity (CGI-S), and the Children's Global Assessment Scale. RESULTS: Nine males with a mean age of 8.9 (SD = 1.2) years were treated. The median quetiapine dose at end of study was 150 mg/day (range 75-350). Mean psychometric scores did not change substantively from baseline. No patients experienced extrapyramidal side effects. Three subjects discontinued due to study nonadherence. No patients discontinued treatment due to an adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary data suggest that quetiapine might be a generally safe and effective maintenance treatment for aggressive children with CD who initially respond to an acute therapeutic trial of quetiapine. More research is needed to confirm or refute these initial findings.