Switch Rates During Acute Treatment for Bipolar II Depression With Lithium, Sertraline, or the Two Combined: A Randomized Double-Blind Comparison.

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared medication-induced mood switch risk (primary outcome), as well as treatment response and side effects (secondary outcomes) with three acute-phase treatments for bipolar II depression. METHOD: In a 16-week, double-blind, multisite comparison study, 142 participants with bipolar II depression were randomly assigned to receive lithium monotherapy (N=49), sertraline monotherapy (N=45), or combination treatment with lithium and sertraline (N=48). At each visit, mood was assessed using standardized rating scales. Rates of switch were compared, as were rates of treatment response and the presence and severity of treatment-emergent side effects. RESULTS: Twenty participants (14%) experienced a switch during the study period (hypomania, N=17; severe hypomania, N=3). Switch rates did not differ among the three treatment groups, even after accounting for dropout. No patient had a manic switch or was hospitalized for a switch. Most switches occurred within the first 5 weeks of treatment. The treatment response rate for the overall sample was 62.7% (N=89), without significant differences between groups after accounting for dropout. The lithium/sertraline combination group had a significantly higher overall dropout rate than the monotherapy groups but did not have an accelerated time to response. CONCLUSIONS: Lithium monotherapy, sertraline monotherapy, and lithium/sertraline combination therapy were associated with similar switch and treatment response rates in participants with bipolar II depression. The dropout rate was higher in the lithium/sertraline combination treatment group, without any treatment acceleration advantage.

First controlled treatment trial of bipolar II hypomania with mixed symptoms: quetiapine versus placebo.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and safety of adjunctive quetiapine (QTP) versus placebo (PBO) for patients with bipolar II disorder (BDII) currently experiencing mixed hypomanic symptoms in a 2-site, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 8-week investigation. METHODS: Participants included 55 adults (age 18-65 years) who met criteria for BDII on the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV-TR (SCID). Entrance criteria included a stable medication regimen for ≥2 weeks and hypomania with mixed symptoms (>12 on the Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] and >15 on the Montgomery Asberg Depression Rating Scale [MADRS] at two consecutive visits 1-3 days apart). Participants were randomly assigned to receive adjunctive quetiapine (n=30) or placebo (n=25). RESULTS: Adjunctive quetiapine demonstrated significantly greater improvement than placebo in Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder Overall Severity scores (F(1)=10.12, p=.002) and MADRS scores (F(1)=6.93, p=.0138), but no significant differences were observed for YMRS scores (F(1)=3.68, p=.069). Side effects of quetiapine were consistent with those observed in previous clinical trials, with sedation/somnolence being the most common, occurring in 53.3% with QTP and 20.0% with PBO. CONCLUSIONS: While QTP was significantly more effective than PBO for overall and depressive symptoms of BDII, there was no significant difference between groups in reducing symptoms of hypomania. Hypomania improved across both groups throughout the study.

Co-occurrence of serious or undiagnosed medical conditions with bipolar disorder preventing clinical trial randomization: a case series.

OBJECTIVE: Studies have shown that patients with bipolar disorder have high rates of serious and/or untreated co-occurring general medical conditions. This case series examined reports of co-occurring medical conditions with bipolar disorder in potential clinical study participants, and in particular the percentage of these individuals who were previously unaware of their conditions. METHOD: Patients were potential participants in 1 of 2 medication trials who met DSM-IV criteria for bipolar disorder and were excluded from those studies just prior to randomization from May 2009 through July 2011. Patients were compared with each other on a number of demographic criteria, including age, race, gender, reason for exclusion from the trial, and psychiatric diagnoses. RESULTS: Of the patients excluded from the studies just prior to randomization, 31% (n = 10) were excluded because of medical conditions previously unreported by the patient during screening for these studies. Seventy percent of those excluded patients (n = 7) had no prior knowledge of their conditions. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that patients with bipolar disorder may not only have high rates of co-occurring medical conditions but also frequently remain unaware of those conditions. These findings indicate that co-occurring general medical conditions may be a more serious problem in the treatment of bipolar disorder than previously appreciated and that more stringent monitoring and guidelines are needed regardless of medication regimen. This case series asserts that, regardless of a patient's claim of having no medical conditions, more general medical screening may be needed in outpatient psychiatric settings.

A single blind comparison of lithium and lamotrigine for the treatment of bipolar II depression.

BACKGROUND: Treatment studies are lacking for patients with bipolar II disorder (BDII). The objective of this study was to compare lamotrigine (LTG) and lithium (Li) monotherapy for the treatment of BDII depression. METHODS: Patients with BDII acute depression were randomized to open-label monotherapy with LTG or Li, and evaluated by trained raters blinded to treatment. Patients were titrated to 200 mg/day of LTG over 8 weeks or at least 900 mg/day of Li over 2 weeks (serum level 0.6-1.2 mEq/L), and seen biweekly for 16 weeks. The primary outcome variable was change in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale 17-item (Ham-D(17)), evaluated using mixed effects random regression. RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvement from baseline to endpoint on the Ham-D(17) (p<0.0001), with no between group differences (p=0.95). Seventy-two percent of the population was rapid cycling by DSM-IV criteria. No differences in response were noted between rapid cyclers and non-rapid cyclers. Early termination for any cause was 42%. The Li group reported significantly more side effects, although drop-out due to side effects did not differ between groups. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by an open treatment design, a lack of placebo arm, and uneven treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Lamotrigine and lithium were effective monotherapy for BDII depression, with comparable response and remission rates. Naturalistic design and lack of placebo limit conclusions, though patient history indicated long standing depression unlikely to be alleviated by time. Patients who received Li reported more side effects, but this did not appear to impact drop-out rates.