Factor structure and reliability of the Italian adaptation of the Hypomania Check List-32, second revision (HCL-32-R2).

OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties of the Italian adaptation of the Hypomania-Check-List 32-item, second revision (HCL-32-R2) for the detection of bipolarity in major depressive disorder (MDD) treatment-seeking outpatients. METHODS: A back-to-back Italian adaption of the "Bipolar Disorders: Improving Diagnosis, Guidance, and Education" English module of the HCL-32-R2 was administered between March 2013 and October 2014 across twelve collaborating sites in Italy. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual Fourth edition (DSM-IV) diagnoses were made adopting the mini-international neuropsychiatric interview, using bipolar disorder (BD) patients as controls. RESULTS: In our sample (n=441, of whom, BD-I=68; BD-II=117; MDD=256), using a cut-off of 14 allowed the HCL-32-R2 to discriminate DSM-IV-defined MDD patients between "true unipolar" (HCL-32-R2(-)) and "sub-threshold bipolar depression" (HCL-32-R2(+)) with sensitivity=89% and specificity=79%. Area under the curve was .888; positive and negative predictive values were 75.34% and 90.99% respectively. Owing to clinical interpretability considerations and consistency with previous adaptations of the HCL-32, a two-factor solution (F1="hyperactive/elated" vs. F2="irritable/distractible/impulsive") was preferred using exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses, whereas items n.33 ("I gamble more") and n.34 ("I eat more") introduced in the R2 version of the scale slightly loaded onto F2 and F1 respectively. Cronbach׳s α=.88 for F1 and .71 for F2. LIMITATIONS: No cross-validation with any additional validated screening tool; treatment-seeking outpatient sample; recall bias; no systematic evaluation of eventual medical/psychiatric comorbidities, current/lifetime pharmacological history, neither record of severity of current MDE. CONCLUSIONS: Our results seem to indicate fair accuracy of HCL-32 as a screening instrument for BD, though replication studies are warranted.

Duloxetine-bupropion combination for treatment-resistant atypical depression: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

The efficacy, safety, and tolerability of combined bupropion versus placebo using duloxetine as active reference drug, in patients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of major depression with atypical features and a history of treatment resistance, were evaluated in this preliminary six-week study. Patients (n=46) had a baseline Hamilton Depression Scale (HAM-D) ≥14 and were randomly assigned to 150/300 mg/day bupropion vs. placebo, which was added to 60 to 120 mg/day duloxetine depending on baseline depression severity. Atypical features of depression were assessed using the additional eight-item module of the Structured Interview Guide for the HAM-D with the Atypical Depression Supplement. By week 6, only five (21.7%) patients receiving duloxetine+placebo vs. six (26.1%) patients on the bupropion combination achieved response. No significant difference in final HAM-D scores between the two groups was observed between those patients achieving response. The presence of a higher number of atypical features significantly predicted non-response, with the relevant binary logistic regression model correctly classifying 17 out 22 (77.3%) of non-responders [Exp(B)=0.294; p=0.016] vs. 17 out 23 (73.9%) [Exp(B)=0.353; p=0.028] non-responder cases in the "+placebo" and "+bupropion" groups, respectively. In those patients receiving bupropion, treatment-emergent adverse events leading to withdrawal were more common among those receiving lower doses of the combination drug, and no life-threating dangers were noted. Additional studies, including an adequate course of duloxetine trial, are nonetheless aimed to allow a firm conclusion about the usefulness of the combination of duloxetine and bupropion for treatment-resistant cases of major depression with atypical features.

Treatment adherence towards prescribed medications in bipolar-II acute depressed patients: relationship with cyclothymic temperament and "therapeutic sensation seeking" in response towards subjective intolerance to pain.

BACKGROUND: Treatment adherence (TA) is crucial during almost any phase of bipolar disorder (BD), including type-II (BD-II) acute depression. While a number of issues have been traditionally accounted on the matter, additional factors should be likewise involved, including affective temperaments and some clinically suggestive psychopathological traits whose systematic assessment represents the aim of this study. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty BD-II acute depressed outpatients were consecutively evaluated using the Structured Clinical Interviews for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders-Fourth Edition Axis-I and II Disorders, Hamilton scales for Depression and Anxiety, Temperament Evaluation of the Memphis Pisa Paris San Diego-Auto-questionnaire-110-item, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS), Zuckerman's Sensation-Seeking Scale-Form-V (SSS-V), Barratt's Impulsivity Scale-11-item, State-Trait Anxiety Inventory modules, Severity module of the Clinical Global Impression Scale for BD, Morisky 8-Item Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8) and the Clinician Rating Scale (CRS). Patients were divided into non-adherent vs. treatment-adherent cases depending on MMAS-8+CRS scores. RESULTS: In the TA(-) group, higher VAS and cyclothymic temperament scores were highly correlated (r=.699; p≤.001). Those latter scores, along with SSS-V scores and the occurrence of lifetime addiction to painkiller and/or homeopathic medications available over the counter defined a "therapeutic sensation seeking" pattern allowing to correctly classify as much as 93.9% [Exp(B)=3.490; p≤.001] of TA(-) cases (49/220). LIMITS: Lack of objective TA measures and systematic pharmacological record; recall bias on some diagnoses; and relatively small sample size. CONCLUSIONS: Stating the burden of TA in BD, additional studies on this regard are aimed, ideally contributing to enhance the management of BD itself.

Sensation seeking in major depressive patients: relationship to sub-threshold bipolarity and cyclothymic temperament.

BACKGROUND: High levels of sensation seeking (SS) have been traditionally reported for lifetime bipolar disorder (BD) and/or substance use disorder (SUD) rather than major depressive disorder (MDD). Nonetheless, a renewed clinical attention toward the burden of sub-threshold bipolarity in MDD, solicits for a better assessment of "unipolar" major depressive episodes (MDEs) via characterization of putative differential psychopathological patterns, including SS and predominant affective temperament. METHODS: Two hundred and eighty currently depressed cases of MDD and 87 healthy controls were screened using the Zuckerman's sensation seeking scale-Form-V, the Hypomania Check List-32-item (HCL-32), the Temperament Evaluation of Memphis, Pisa, Paris and San Diego Auto-questionnaire-110-item, the Barratt Impulsivity Scale-11-item, the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory modules and the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV axis-I disorders. Cases were divided into HCL-32(+)(sub-threshold bipolar)/HCL-32(-)("true" unipolar depressed) depending on the HCL-32 total score. RESULTS: Upon correlation and multivariate regression analyses, the HCL-32(+) patients showed the highest levels of SS, higher prevalence of cyclothymic temperament, and higher rates of multiple lifetime axis-I co-morbidities, including SUD. LIMITS: Recall bias on some diagnoses, including BD, grossly matched healthy control group, lack of ad-hoc validated measures for ADHD, SUD, or axis-II disorders. CONCLUSIONS: In our sample, the occurrence of higher levels of SS in "sub-threshold" bipolar cases outlined a differential psychopathological profile compared to DSM-defined "true unipolar" cases of MDE. If confirmed by replication studies, these findings may aid clinicians in delivering a more accurate diagnosis and a safer use of antidepressants in some MDD cases.