Effective mood stabilization with a chelated mineral supplement: an open-label trial in bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: To determine in open trials the therapeutic benefit of a nutritional supplement for bipolar disorder. METHOD: The sample consisted of 11 patients with DSM-IV-diagnosed bipolar disorder aged 19 to 46 years, who were taking a mean of 2.7 psychotropic medications each at study entry. Three additional patients dropped out prematurely. The intervention is a broad-based nutritional supplement of dietary nutrients, primarily chelated trace minerals and vitamins, administered in high doses. At study entry and periodically thereafter, patients were assessed with the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), and the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). RESULTS: For those who completed the minimum 6-month open trial, symptom reduction ranged from 55% to 66% on the outcome measures; need for psychotropic medications decreased by more than 50%. Paired t tests revealed treatment benefit on all measures for patients completing the trial: HAM-D mean score at entry = 19.0, mean score at last visit = 5.4, t = 5.59, df = 9, p < 01; BPRS mean score at entry = 35.3, mean score at last visit = 7.4, t = 2.57, df = 9, p <.05; YMRS mean score at entry = 15.1, mean score at last visit = 6.0, t = 4.11, df = 9, p < .01. The effect size for the intervention was large (> .80) for each measure. The number of psychotropic medications decreased significantly to a mean +/- SD of 1.0+/-1.1 (t = 3.54, df = 10, p < .01). In some cases, the supplement replaced psychotropic medications and the patients remained well. The only reported side effect (i.e., nausea) was infrequent, minor, and transitory. CONCLUSION: Some cases of bipolar illness may be ameliorated by nutritional supplementation. A randomized, placebo-controlled trial in adults with bipolar I disorder is currently underway, as well as open trials in children.

Multicenter, placebo-controlled study of fluoxetine in seasonal affective disorder.

OBJECTIVE: The authors investigated the efficacy and safety of fluoxetine in the treatment of winter seasonal affective disorder. METHOD: Sixty-eight outpatients who met the DSM-III-R criteria for recurrent major depressive episodes, seasonal (winter) pattern, were randomly assigned to 5 weeks of treatment with fluoxetine, 20 mg/day (N = 36), or placebo (N = 32). The outcome measures included the 29-item modified Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, administered by experienced clinicians, and the self-rated Beck Depression Inventory; adverse events and safety data were also recorded. Clinical response was defined as a greater than 50% reduction in depression score between baseline and study termination. RESULTS: Both groups showed significant improvement. The fluoxetine group had lower depression scores at termination than the placebo group, but these differences did not achieve statistical significance. However, the rate of clinical response in the fluoxetine group (59%) was superior to that in the placebo group (34%). Post hoc analyses showed that the greatest fluoxetine responses were in the most markedly depressed patients and that overall response was greater for patients studied later in the season. Fluoxetine was well tolerated, and few subjects dropped out because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of clinical response rate, fluoxetine appears to be an effective, well-tolerated treatment for seasonal affective disorder. Because the differences between fluoxetine and placebo in the continuous outcome measures did not reach statistical significance, further studies with larger study groups and longer treatment periods are required to conclusively demonstrate efficacy of fluoxetine for seasonal affective disorder.