Validity of the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier Interview.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the reliability and validity of a semi-structured interview assessing the features of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier. Our goal was to develop an instrument that could be used for both diagnostic and severity measurement purposes. METHODS: Four hundred fifty-nine psychiatric patients in a depressive episode were interviewed by a trained diagnostic rater who administered semi-structured interviews including the DSM-5 Mixed Features Specifier Interview (DMSI). We examined the inter-rater reliability and psychometric properties of the DMSI. The patients were rated on clinician rating scales of depression, anxiety, and irritability, and measures of psychosocial functioning, suicidality, and family history of bipolar disorder. RESULTS: The DMSI had excellent joint-interview interrater reliability. More than twice as many patients met the DSM-5 mixed features specifier criteria during the week before the assessment than for the majority of the episode (9.4% vs. 3.9%). DMSI total scores were more highly correlated with a clinician-rated measure of manic symptoms than with measures of depression and anxiety. More patients with bipolar depression met the mixed features specifier than patients with MDD. Amongst patients with MDD, those with mixed features more frequently had a family history of bipolar disorder, were more frequently diagnosed with anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, and borderline personality disorder, more frequently had attempted suicide, and were more severely depressed, anxious, and irritable. CONCLUSION: The DMSI is a reliable and valid measure of the presence of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier in depressed patients as well as the severity of the features of the specifier.

Anxious distress in people with major depressive episodes: a cross-sectional analysis of clinical correlates.

OBJECTIVE: Most people with major depressive episodes meet the criteria for the anxious distress (AD) specifier defined by DSM-5 as the presence of symptoms such as feelings of tension, restlessness, difficulty concentrating, and fear that something awful may happen. This cross-sectional study was aimed at identifying clinical correlates of AD in people with unipolar or bipolar depression. METHODS: Inpatients with a current major depressive episode were included. Data on socio-demographic and clinical variables were collected. The SCID-5 was used to diagnose depressive episodes and relevant specifiers. The Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) and Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) were used to assess the severity of depressive and manic (mixed) symptoms, respectively. Multiple logistic regression analyses were carried out to identify clinical correlates of AD. RESULTS: We included 206 people (mean age: 48.4 ± 18.6 yrs.; males: 38.8%) admitted for a major depressive episode (155 with major depressive disorder and 51 with bipolar disorder). Around two-thirds of the sample (N = 137; 66.5%) had AD. Multiple logistic regression models showed that AD was associated with mixed features, higher YMRS scores, psychotic features, and a diagnosis of major depressive disorder (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Despite some limitations, including the cross-sectional design and the inpatient setting, our study shows that AD is likely to be associated with mixed and psychotic features, as well as with unipolar depression. The identification of these clinical domains may help clinicians to better contextualize AD in the context of major depressive episodes.

Which mixed depression model? A comparison between DSM-5-defined mixed features and Koukopoulos' criteria.

BACKGROUND: The criteria of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders 5th edition "with mixed features specifier" (DSM-5 MFS) are considered controversial since they include only typical manic symptoms. By contrast, Koukopoulos developed an alternative model of mixed depression (MxD) focusing primarily on the excitatory component. OBJECTIVE: To compare DSM-5 MFS and Koukopoulos' MxD (KMxD) in terms of prevalence, associated clinical variables, and discriminative capacity for bipolar depression in patients with major depressive episode (MDE). METHODS: A total of 300 patients with MDE-155 with major depressive disorder and 145 with bipolar disorder (BD)-were recruited. The discriminative capacity of DSM-5 MFS and KMxD criteria for BD was estimated using the area under the curves of receiver operating characteristic (ROC_AUC). The clinical variables associated with these two diagnostic constructs were assessed by performing a logistic regression. RESULTS: A total of 44 and 165 patients met the DSM-5 MFS and KMxD criteria, respectively. The ROC_AUCs and their confidence intervals for BD according to DSM-5 MFS and KMxD were 77.0% (72.0%-82.1%) and 71.9% (66.2%-77.7%), respectively. The optimal thresholds (combining sensitivity and specificity measures) for BD diagnosis were ≥1 (77%/68%) for DSM-5 MFS and ≥3 symptoms (78%/66%) for KMxD. However, considering the DSM-5 MFS cut-off (≥3 symptoms), the specificity (97%) increased at the expense of sensitivity (26%). CONCLUSIONS: KMxD and DSM-5-MFS showed an overlapping discriminative capacity for bipolar depression. The current diagnostic threshold of DSM-5 MFS did not prove to be very inclusive, if compared with the greater diagnostic sensitivity of KMxD, which also yielded better association with clinical variables related to mixedness.

Lumateperone for the Treatment of Adults With Schizophrenia: a Systematic Review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Lumateperone (LUM) is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved atypical antipsychotic agent for adults with schizophrenia (SCZ) and bipolar depression (for both bipolar I and bipolar II disorder as as monotherapy or as adjunctive treatment to lithium or valproate). LUM simultaneously modulates serotonin, dopamine, and glutamate neurotransmission. The foregoing pleiotropic mechanism of action is predictive of therapeutic benefits across multiple domains of psychopathology in SCZ (i.e., positive, negative, cognitive, and prosocial symptoms). Herein, the overarching aim is to synthesize the extant literature reporting on the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LUM in adults with SCZ. RECENT FINDINGS: Four clinical studies (i.e., three RCTs and one open-label trial) were included in this synthesis. Overall, LUM significantly reduced the severity of SCZ compared with placebo. The open label study provided the real-world effectiveness of shifting stable patients with SCZ to LUM from other atypical antipsychotics. With respect to safety and tolerability profile, LUM demonstrated placebo-level rates of weight gain, metabolic shift, prolactin elevation, extrapyramidal side effects (EPS), and akathisia across short term trials (i.e., 4-6 weeks). Taken together, our results indicate that LUM significantly improves symptoms severity in adults with SCZ. LUM also exhibits a favorable tolerability and safety profile with placebo level rates of weight gain, metabolic disruption, akathisia, extrapyramidal side effects (excluding akathisia), and prolactin elevation. Lumateperone should be conceptualized as a first-line treatment strategy for adults with SCZ.

Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) recommendations for the management of patients with bipolar disorder with mixed presentations.

OBJECTIVES: The 2018 Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) guidelines provided clinicians with pragmatic treatment recommendations for bipolar disorder (BD). While these guidelines included commentary on how mixed features may direct treatment selection, specific recommendations were not provided-a critical gap which the current update aims to address. METHOD: Overview of research regarding mixed presentations in BD, with treatment recommendations developed using a modified CANMAT/ISBD rating methodology. Limitations are discussed, including the dearth of high-quality data and reliance on expert opinion. RESULTS: No agents met threshold for first-line treatment of DSM-5 manic or depressive episodes with mixed features. For mania + mixed features second-line treatment options include asenapine, cariprazine, divalproex, and aripiprazole. In depression + mixed features, cariprazine and lurasidone are recommended as second-line options. For DSM-IV defined mixed episodes, with a longer history of research, asenapine and aripiprazole are first-line, and olanzapine (monotherapy or combination), carbamazepine, and divalproex are second-line. Research on maintenance treatments following a DSM-5 mixed presentation is extremely limited, with third-line recommendations based on expert opinion. For maintenance treatment following a DSM-IV mixed episode, quetiapine (monotherapy or combination) is first-line, and lithium and olanzapine identified as second-line options. CONCLUSION: The CANMAT and ISBD groups hope these guidelines provide valuable support for clinicians providing care to patients experiencing mixed presentations, as well as further influence investment in research to improve diagnosis and treatment of this common and complex clinical state.

The relationship between depression with anxious distress DSM-5 specifier and mixed depression: a network analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Epidemiological, clinical, and treatment response characteristics of major depression with anxious distress (ADS) are quite similar to those of mixed depression, but no study investigated the symptom interplay of these conditions. OBJECTIVE: To analyze the correlations among symptom criteria for major depression with ADS and for mixed depression using a network analysis. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-one outpatients with major depression were consecutively recruited. DSM-5 criteria for major depression with ADS or with mixed features (MF) and Koukopoulos' criteria for mixed depression (MXD) were assessed using a structured clinical interview. RESULTS: A total of 58.9% of patients met DSM-5 criteria for major depression with ADS, 48.5% for MXD, and 2.5% for major depression with MF, so that the symptoms of this specifier were excluded from the network analysis. The most frequent symptoms were difficulty concentrating due to worries (57.7%), feeling keyed up or on edge (51%) (major depression with ADS), and psychic agitation or inner tension (51%) (MXD). Psychic agitation or inner tension had a central position in the network and bridged MXD to major depression with ADS through feeling keyed up or on edge. CONCLUSIONS: Criteria for major depression with ADS and for MXD are partially overlapping, with psychic agitation or inner tension and feeling keyed up or on edge that feature in both conditions and are difficult to distinguish in clinical practice. The clarification of the relationship between these two psychopathological conditions could bring important implications for diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of depressive episodes.

Treatment of Mixed Features in Bipolar Disorder: an Updated View.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Mixed presentations in bipolar disorder have long posed clinical and nosological challenges. The DSM-5 mixed features specifier was developed to provide a more flexible and clinically relevant definition of mixed presentations compared with narrowly defined DSM-IV mixed episodes. However, there is little guidance on treating such presentations. Here, we summarize the evidence for biological treatments of DSM-5 and similarly defined mixed features (MFs). RECENT FINDINGS: The literature on treating MFs is almost exclusively based on post hoc analyses. Within this limited evidence base is preliminary positive data for aripiprazole, asenapine, cariprazine, olanzapine, risperidone, and ziprasidone in treating acute mania with MFs, and cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine, and ziprasidone for depressive symptoms in depression with MFs. Divalproex may also be efficacious for acute mania with MFs. The few extant maintenance studies suggest that divalproex and olanzapine may have long-term efficacy in those with index MFs or for the prevention of MFs, respectively. The existing evidence suggests that clinicians consider atypical antipsychotics and divalproex for treating acute mixed presentations. However, adequately powered treatment trials-and studies of maintenance and neurostimulation therapies-are needed. Additionally, data-driven techniques to identify relevant symptom clusters may help improve our conceptualization of mixed presentations.

Cariprazine efficacy in bipolar I depression with and without concurrent manic symptoms: post hoc analysis of 3 randomized, placebo-controlled studies.

OBJECTIVE: Mixed presentations, defined by simultaneous occurrence of depressive and manic symptoms, are difficult to treat. Antidepressants, although commonly used, have weak evidence of efficacy and may increase risk of mood destabilization. The aim of this pooled post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of cariprazine in the treatment of bipolar depression with or without concurrent manic symptoms. METHODS: Patients from 3 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies who met DSM-IV-TR or DSM-5 criteria for bipolar I disorder with a current major depressive episode were identified to have concurrent manic symptoms by baseline Young Mania Rating Scale total score ≥4. Efficacy was assessed in cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day dose groups versus placebo; analyses included the least squares mean change from baseline to week 6 in Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. RESULTS: Of 1383 patients randomized to treatment, 808 (58.4%) had concurrent manic symptoms. For patients with manic symptoms, mean reduction in MADRS total score from baseline to week 6 was significantly greater for both cariprazine 1.5 and 3 mg/day compared with placebo, with least squares mean differences (LSMDs) versus placebo of -2.5 (p = .0033) and -2.9 (p = .0010), respectively; for patients without manic symptoms, the LSMD was significant for 1.5 mg/day (-3.3; p = .0008), but not for 3 mg/day (-1.9; p = .0562). CONCLUSION: The results of this post hoc analysis suggest that cariprazine may be an appropriate treatment option for patients with bipolar I depression with or without manic symptoms, with higher doses potentially more effective in patients with manic symptoms.

Identification and initial validation of empirically derived bipolar symptom states from a large longitudinal dataset: an application of hidden Markov modeling to the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study.

BACKGROUND: Although bipolar disorder (BD) is a fundamentally cyclical illness, a divided model of BD that emphasizes polarity over cyclicity has dominated modern psychiatric diagnostic systems since their advent in the 1980s. However, there has been a gradual return to conceptualizations of BD which focus on longitudinal course in the research community due to emerging supportive data. Advances in longitudinal statistical methods promise to further progress the field. METHODS: The current study employed hidden Markov modeling to uncover empirically derived manic and depressive states from longitudinal data [i.e. Young Mania Rating Scale and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale responses across five occasions from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) study], estimate participants' probabilities of transitioning between these states over time (n = 3918), and evaluate whether clinical variables (e.g. rapid cycling and substance dependence) predict participants' state transitions (n = 3229). RESULTS: Analyses identified three empirically derived mood states ('euthymic,' 'depressed,' and 'mixed'). Relative to the euthymic and depressed states, the mixed state was less commonly experienced, more temporally unstable, and uniquely associated with rapid cycling, substance use, and psychosis. Individuals assigned to the mixed state at baseline were relatively less likely to be diagnosed with BD-II (v. BD-I), more likely to present with a mixed or (hypo)manic episode, and reported experiencing irritable and elevated mood more frequently. CONCLUSIONS: The results from the current study represent an important step in defining, and characterizing the longitudinal course of, empirically derived mood states that can be used to form the foundation of objective, empirical attempts to define meaningful subtypes of affective illness defined by clinical course.

Agitated depression in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES: It has been suggested that agitated depression (AD) is a common, severe feature in bipolar disorder. We aimed to estimate the prevalence of AD and investigate whether presence of AD was associated with episodic and lifetime clinical features in a large well-characterized bipolar disorder sample. METHOD: The prevalence of agitation, based on semi-structured interview and medical case-notes, in the most severe depressive episode was estimated in 2925 individuals with DSM-IV bipolar disorder recruited into the UK Bipolar Disorder Research Network. Predictors of agitation were ascertained using symptoms within the same episode and lifetime clinical features using multivariate models. RESULTS: 32.3% (n = 946) experienced agitation during the worst depressive episode. Within the same episode, significant predictors of presence of agitation were: insomnia (OR 2.119, P < 0.001), poor concentration (OR 1.966, P = 0.027), decreased libido (OR 1.960, P < 0.001), suicidal ideation (OR 1.861, P < 0.001), slowed activity (OR 1.504, P = 0.001), and poor appetite (OR 1.297, P = 0.029). Over the lifetime illness course, co-morbid panic disorder (OR 2.000, P < 0.001), suicide attempt (OR 1.399, P = 0.007), and dysphoric mania (OR 1.354, P = 0.017) were significantly associated with AD. CONCLUSIONS: Agitation accompanied bipolar depression in at least one-third of cases in our sample and was associated with concurrent somatic depressive symptoms, which are also common features of mixed manic states. Furthermore, AD in our sample was associated with lifetime experience of mixed mania, in addition to severe lifetime illness course including comorbid panic disorder and suicidal behavior. Our results have implications for the diagnosis and treatment of agitated features in bipolar depression.

Characteristics of depressive and bipolar disorder patients with mixed features.

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

Mixed states in bipolar and major depressive disorders: systematic review and quality appraisal of guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review provided a critical synthesis and a comprehensive overview of guidelines on the treatment of mixed states. METHOD: The MEDLINE/PubMed and EMBASE databases were systematically searched from inception to March 21st, 2018. International guidelines covering the treatment of mixed episodes, manic/hypomanic, or depressive episodes with mixed features were considered for inclusion. A methodological quality assessment was conducted with the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation-AGREE II. RESULTS: The final selection yielded six articles. Despite their heterogeneity, all guidelines agreed in interrupting an antidepressant monotherapy or adding mood-stabilizing medications. Olanzapine seemed to have the best evidence for acute mixed hypo/manic/depressive states and maintenance treatment. Aripiprazole and paliperidone were possible alternatives for acute hypo/manic mixed states. Lurasidone and ziprasidone were useful in acute mixed depression. Valproate was recommended for the prevention of new mixed episodes while lithium and quetiapine in preventing affective episodes of all polarities. Clozapine and electroconvulsive therapy were effective in refractory mixed episodes. The AGREE II overall assessment rate ranged between 42% and 92%, indicating different quality level of included guidelines. CONCLUSION: The unmet needs for the mixed symptoms treatment were associated with diagnostic issues and limitations of previous research, particularly for maintenance treatment.

Obesity in patients with major depression is related to bipolarity and mixed features: evidence from the BRIDGE-II-Mix study.

OBJECTIVES: The Bipolar Disorders: Improving Diagnosis, Guidance and Education (BRIDGE)-II-Mix study aimed to estimate the frequency of mixed states in patients with a major depressive episode (MDE) according to different definitions. The present post-hoc analysis evaluated the association between obesity and the presence of mixed features and bipolarity. METHODS: A total of 2811 MDE subjects were enrolled in a multicenter cross-sectional study. In 2744 patients, the body mass index (BMI) was evaluated. Psychiatric symptoms, and sociodemographic and clinical variables were collected, comparing the characteristics of MDE patients with (MDE-OB) and without (MDE-NOB) obesity. RESULTS: Obesity (BMI ≥30) was registered in 493 patients (18%). In the MDE-OB group, 90 patients (20%) fulfilled the DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar disease (BD), 225 patients (50%) fulfilled the bipolarity specifier criteria, 59 patients (13%) fulfilled DSM-5 criteria for MDEs with mixed features, and 226 patients (50%) fulfilled Research-Based Diagnostic Criteria for an MDE. Older age, history of (hypo)manic switches during antidepressant treatment, the occurrence of three or more MDEs, atypical depressive features, antipsychotic treatment, female gender, depressive mixed state according to DSM-5 criteria, comorbid eating disorders, and anxiety disorders were significantly associated with the MDE-OB group. Among (hypo)manic symptoms during the current MDE, psychomotor agitation, distractibility, increased energy, and risky behaviors were the variables most frequently associated with MDE-OB group. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, the presence of obesity in patients with an MDE seemed to be associated with higher rates of bipolar spectrum disorders. These findings suggest that obesity in patients with an MDE could be considered as a possible marker of bipolarity.

Characteristics of depression among offspring at high and low familial risk of bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVES: Having a parent with bipolar disorder (BP) is a very strong risk factor for developing BP. Similarly, depression among youth is a clinical risk factor for subsequent BP. We evaluated whether mood symptomatology in depressed youth is different between those at high and low familial risk to develop BP. METHODS: The most severe major depressive episode in BP offspring (N=61) and community control offspring (N=20) was evaluated using expanded depression and mania rating scales derived from the Schedule for Affective Disorders and Schizophrenia for Children Present Version. The results were adjusted for any between-group significant demographic differences and for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: The severity of depressive symptoms and the percentage of offspring with severe depressive symptoms, especially atypical depressive features, were significantly higher in the depressed offspring of BP parents compared to the depressed controls (Ps <.05). The depressive symptoms were helpful to identify a high-risk group (e.g., odds ratio [OR] for hypersomnia: 22.4, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.3-404, P=.04). In addition, there were significantly more depressed offspring of BP parents with subsyndromal manic symptoms than controls (52.5% vs 20%, OR: 4.2, 95% CI: 1.2-14.7, P<.01). CONCLUSIONS: Depressed BP offspring had more severe depression including atypical depressive symptoms, and were more likely to have subsyndromal mixed manic symptoms than depressed control offspring. Prospective studies to evaluate whether these youth are at high risk to develop BP are warranted. If replicated, the results of this study have important clinical (e.g., treatment of depression in depressed offspring of BP parents) and research implications.

Aggressiveness in depression: a neglected symptom possibly associated with bipolarity and mixed features.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate aggressiveness during a major depressive episode (MDE) and its relationship with bipolar disorder (BD) in a post hoc analysis of the BRIDGE-II-MIX study. METHOD: A total of 2811 individuals were enrolled in this multicenter cross-sectional study. MDE patients with (MDE-A, n = 399) and without aggressiveness (MDE-N, n = 2412) were compared through chi-square test or Student's t-test. A stepwise backward logistic regression model was performed. RESULTS: MDE-A group was more frequently associated with BD (P < 0.001), while aggressiveness was negatively correlated with unipolar depression (P < 0.001). At the logistic regression, aggressiveness was associated with the age at first depressive episode (P < 0.001); the severity of mania (P = 0.03); the diagnosis of BD (P = 0.001); comorbid borderline personality disorder (BPD) (P < 0.001) but not substance abuse (P = 0.63); no current psychiatric treatment (P < 0.001); psychotic symptoms (P = 0.007); the marked social/occupational impairment (P = 0.002). The variable most significantly associated with aggressiveness was the presence of DSM-5 mixed features (P < 0.001, OR = 3.815). After the exclusion of BPD, the variable of lifetime suicide attempts became significant (P = 0.013, OR = 1.405). CONCLUSION: Aggressiveness seems to be significantly associated with bipolar spectrum disorders, independently from BPD and substance abuse. Aggressiveness should be considered as a diagnostic criterion for the mixed features specifier and a target of tailored treatment strategy.

Lurasidone for major depressive disorder with mixed features and anxiety: a post-hoc analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in treating patients with major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features who present with mild and moderate-to-severe levels of anxiety. METHODS: The data in this analysis were derived from a study of patients meeting the DSM-IV-TR criteria for unipolar MDD, with a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥26, presenting with two or three protocol-defined manic symptoms, who were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with either lurasidone 20-60 mg/day (n=109) or placebo (n=100). Anxiety severity was evaluated using the Hamilton Anxiety Rating Scale (HAM-A). To evaluate the effect of baseline anxiety on response to lurasidone, the following two anxiety groups were defined: mild anxiety (HAM-A≤14) and moderate-to-severe anxiety (HAM-A≥15). Change from baseline in MADRS total score was analyzed for each group using a mixed model for repeated measures. RESULTS: Treatment with lurasidone was associated with a significant week 6 change versus placebo in MADRS total score for patients with both mild anxiety (-18.4 vs. -12.8, p<0.01, effect size [ES]=0.59) and moderate-to-severe anxiety (-22.0 vs. -13.0, p<0.001, ES=0.95). Treatment with lurasidone was associated with a significant week 6 change versus placebo in HAM-A total score for patients with both mild anxiety (-7.6 vs. -4.0, p<0.01, ES=0.62), and moderate-to-severe anxiety (-11.4 vs. -6.1, p<0.0001, ES=0.91). CONCLUSIONS: In this post-hoc analysis of an MDD with mixed features and anxiety population, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant improvement in both depressive and anxiety symptoms in subgroups with mild and moderate-to-severe levels of anxiety at baseline.

Lurasidone for major depressive disorder with mixed features and irritability: a post-hoc analysis.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of lurasidone in treating major depressive disorder (MDD) with mixed features including irritability. METHODS: The data in this analysis were derived from a study of patients meeting DSM-IV-TR criteria for unipolar MDD, with a Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥26, presenting with two or three protocol-defined manic symptoms, and who were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with either lurasidone 20-60 mg/d (n=109) or placebo (n=100). We defined "irritability" as a score ≥2 on both the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) irritability item (#5) and the disruptive-aggressive item (#9). Endpoint change in the MADRS and YMRS items 5 and 9 were analyzed using a mixed model for repeated measures for patients with and without irritability. RESULTS: Some 20.7% of patients met the criteria for irritability. Treatment with lurasidone was associated with a significant week 6 change vs. placebo in MADRS score in both patients with (-22.6 vs. -9.5, p<0.0001, effect size [ES]=1.4) and without (-19.9 vs. -13.8, p<0.0001, ES=0.7) irritability. In patients with irritable features, treatment with lurasidone was associated with significant week 6 changes vs. placebo in both the YMRS irritability item (-1.4 vs. -0.3, p=0.0012, ES=1.0) and the YMRS disruptive-aggressive item (-1.0 vs. -0.3, p=0.0002, ES=1.2). CONCLUSIONS: In our post-hoc analysis of a randomized, placebo-controlled, 6-week trial, treatment with lurasidone significantly improved depressive symptoms in MDD patients with mixed features including irritability. In addition, irritability symptoms significantly improved in patients treated with lurasidone.

Dysphoric mania, mixed states, and mania with mixed features specifier: are we mixing things up?

Various terms have been used to describe mania when it is accompanied by depressive symptoms. In this article, we attempt to define and discuss 3 of these terms: dysphoric mania, mixed state, and mania with mixed features specifier. We conclude that whatever term is used, it is important to be aware that mania is more often unpleasant than pleasant, and that the unpleasantness is not limited to depression.

What is the role of conventional antidepressants in the treatment of major depressive episodes with Mixed Features Specifier?

The newly introduced Mixed Features Specifier of Major Depressive Episode and Disorder (MDE/MDD) is especially challenging in terms of pharmacological management. Prior to the publication of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, the symptoms of the mixed features specifier were intradepressive hypomanic symptoms, always and only associated with bipolar disorder (BD). Intradepressive hypomanic symptoms, mostly referred to as depressive mixed states (DMX), have been poorly characterized, and their treatment offers significant challenges. To understand the diagnostic context of DMX, we trace the nosological changes and collocation of intradepressive hypomanic symptoms, and examine diagnostic and prognostic implications of such mixed features. One of the reasons so little is known about the treatment of DMX is that depressed patients with rapid cycling, substance abuse disorder, and suicidal ideation/attempts are routinely excluded from clinical trials of antidepressants. The exclusion of DMX patients from clinical trials has prevented an assessment of the safety and tolerability of short- and long-term use of antidepressants. Therefore, the generalization of data obtained in clinical trials for unipolar depression to patients with intradepressive hypomanic features is inappropriate and methodologically flawed. A selective review of the literature shows that antidepressants alone have limited efficacy in DMX, but they have the potential to induce, maintain, or worsen mixed features during depressive episodes in BD. On the other hand, preliminary evidence supports the effective use of some atypical antipsychotics in the treatment of DMX.

Measures of the DSM-5 mixed-features specifier of major depressive disorder.

During the past two decades, a number of studies have found that depressed patients frequently have manic symptoms intermixed with depressive symptoms. While the frequency of mixed syndromes are more common in bipolar than in unipolar depressives, mixed states are also common in patients with major depressive disorder. The admixture of symptoms may be evident when depressed patients present for treatment, or they may emerge during ongoing treatment. In some patients, treatment with antidepressant medication might precipitate the emergence of mixed states. It would therefore be useful to systematically inquire into the presence of manic/hypomanic symptoms in depressed patients. We can anticipate that increased attention will likely be given to mixed depression because of changes in the DSM-5. In the present article, I review instruments that have been utilized to assess the presence and severity of manic symptoms and therefore could be potentially used to identify the DSM-5 mixed-features specifier in depressed patients and to evaluate the course and outcome of treatment. In choosing which measure to use, clinicians and researchers should consider whether the measure assesses both depression and mania/hypomania, assesses all or only some of the DSM-5 criteria for the mixed-features specifier, or assesses manic/hypomanic symptoms that are not part of the DSM-5 definition. Feasibility, more so than reliability and validity, will likely determine whether these measures are incorporated into routine clinical practice.