C.M. Bonnin

Clinical and neurocognitive predictors of functional outcome in bipolar euthymic patients: A long-term, follow-up study

OBJECTIVE To identify clinical and neurocognitive predictors of long-term functional outcome in patients with bipolar disorder METHODS A total of 32 subjects who met criteria for bipolar I or II disorder were recruited from the Barcelona Bipolar Disorder Program and were assessed clinically and neuropsychologically at baseline. After an average 4-year follow-up, they were interviewed with the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST) to assess functional outcome. Multivariate analyses were applied to identify clinical and neurocognitive predictors of functional outcome. RESULTS The main regression model for predictors of overall psychosocial functioning identified subclinical depressive symptoms (beta=0.516, t=3.51, p=0.002), and free delayed recall in a verbal memory task (beta=-0.314, t=-2.144, p=0.041), accounting for 36% of the variance. Specific predictors of occupational functioning were, again, subthreshold depression (beta=0.435, t=2.8, p=0.009) and a measure of executive function, digits backwards (beta=-0.347, t=-2.23, p=0.034). This model explained around 28% of the variance (corrected R(2)=0.28; F=6.38, gl=2, p=0.004). CONCLUSIONS Subdepressive symptomatology together with neurocognitive impairments related to verbal memory and executive functions are predictor variables of long-term functional outcome in bipolar disorder.

Efficacy of Functional Remediation in Bipolar Disorder: A Multicenter Randomized Controlled Study

OBJECTIVE The authors sought to assess the efficacy of functional remediation, a novel intervention program, on functional improvement in a sample of euthymic patients with bipolar disorder. METHOD In a multicenter, randomized, rater-blind clinical trial involving 239 outpatients with DSM-IV bipolar disorder, functional remediation (N=77) was compared with psychoeducation (N=82) and treatment as usual (N=80) over 21 weeks. Pharmacological treatment was kept stable in all three groups. The primary outcome measure was improvement in global psychosocial functioning, measured blindly as the mean change in score on the Functioning Assessment Short Test from baseline to endpoint. RESULTS At the end of the study, 183 patients completed the treatment phase. Repeated-measures analysis revealed significant functional improvement from baseline to endpoint over the 21 weeks of treatment (last observation carried forward), suggesting an interaction between treatment assignment and time. Tukeys post hoc tests revealed that functional remediation differed significantly from treatment as usual, but not from psychoeducation. CONCLUSIONS Functional remediation, a novel group intervention, showed efficacy in improving the functional outcome of a sample of euthymic bipolar patients as compared with treatment as usual.

POLARITY INDEX OF PHARMACOLOGICAL AGENTS USED FOR MAINTENANCE TREATMENT OF BIPOLAR DISORDER

Over one half of bipolar patients have been reported to be more prone to either depressive or manic relapses. This study aimed to define profiles of drugs used for maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD) by the means of Polarity Index. Polarity Index is a new metric indicating the relative antimanic versus antidepressive preventive efficacy of drugs. Polarity Index was retrieved by calculating Number Needed to Treat (NNT) for prevention of depression and NNT for prevention of mania ratio, as emerging from the results of randomized placebo-controlled trials. Included trials were randomized and double blind, with a minimal duration of 24 weeks, assessing effectiveness of a mood stabilizer or antipsychotic drug alone or in combination with a mood stabilizing agent versus a placebo comparator in BD maintenance treatment. Polarity Index value above 1.0 indicates a relative greater antimanic prophylactic efficacy, number below 1.0 a relative greater antidepressive efficacy. The polarity index for the drugs used in maintenance therapy for bipolar disorder was 12.09 for risperidone, 4.38 for aripiprazole, 3.91 for ziprasidone, 2.98 for olanzapine, 1.39 for lithium, 1.14 for quetiapine, and 0.40 for lamotrigine. Polarity index of valproate and oxcarbazepine may not be reliable due to the failure of their maintenance trials. The polarity index provides a measure of how much antidepressant versus antimanic a drug is in bipolar disorder prophylaxis, and may guide the choice of maintenance therapy in bipolar patients.

Long-term outcome of cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate the longitudinal course and outcome of cognitive deficits and their clinical correlates in bipolar disorder. METHOD One hundred thirteen participants (68 patients and 45 healthy controls) were assessed by the means of a neuropsychological battery targeting attention, psychomotor speed, verbal memory, and executive functions at baseline: 68 euthymic outpatients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar disorder (53 bipolar I and 15 bipolar II) were enrolled at the Bipolar Disorder Unit of the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona. Forty-five patients completed the follow-up. The assessments started in February 1999 and finished in July 2010. The primary outcome of the study was the change in the neuropsychological performance in the patient group. RESULTS Repeated-measures analyses showed significant effects of time in 2 cognitive domains: attention and executive functions. Attention slightly improved (P = .043) but executive function worsened (P = .001). Regression analyses showed that the duration of illness and baseline subdepressive symptoms were associated with poor performance in executive function. Subdepressive symptoms at endpoint were associated with poor functioning. The best predictor of low functioning was verbal memory dysfunction at baseline. CONCLUSIONS The cognitive impairment remained stable across the follow-up period in many measures assessed except for a worsening of executive measures, which have been found to be associated with the duration of illness and subdepressive symptoms.

Effects of atypical antipsychotics on neurocognition in euthymic bipolar patients.

BACKGROUND Different factors may influence cognitive functioning in bipolar disorder such as the effect of subsyndromal symptoms, the history of psychotic symptomatology or substance abuse, negative symptomatology, chronicity, sleep disturbances, and hormonal factors. The effect of pharmacologic treatment on cognition is still uncertain because of an insufficient number of studies examining this issue. OBJECTIVE The aims of this study were to compare neuropsychologic performance of treated bipolar patients with that of controls, including unmedicated patients and healthy subjects, as well as to evaluate possible neurocognitive differences among 3 different atypical antipsychotics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A total of 119 subjects were included in the study. Of 79 Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition euthymic bipolar patients, 68 were treated with one atypical antipsychotic, quetiapine (n = 12), olanzapine (n = 26), or risperidone (n = 30). Sixteen patients were drug-free. The 4 groups were compared with a sample of drug-naïve patients and a healthy control group (n = 35) on several clinical and neuropsychologic variables, especially on the domains of attention, verbal memory, and executive functions. Euthymia was defined by a score of 6 or less at the Young Mania Rating Scale and a score of 8 or less at the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale for at least 6 months. RESULTS The 5 groups did not differ in age, years of education, sex distribution, or estimated premorbid IQ. The 4 patients groups did not differ in chronicity, age of onset, total number of episodes, and number of hospitalizations. No differences were found regarding antipsychotic dosages between the groups. Bipolar patients performed poorly on most neuropsychologic measures as compared with healthy controls. After controlling for Hamilton Depression Rating Scale symptoms, no significant change in the results was observed. Because many patients with antipsychotic treatment had a history of psychotic symptoms, we performed multivariate analysis of covariance controlling for this variable. Bipolar patients taking 1 of the 3 antipsychotics presented with dose-independent significant deficits in most cognitive tasks compared with healthy controls. After several head-to-head group comparisons, the patients receiving quetiapine showed a better performance in learning task, short-term memory, and recognition task assessed with the California Verbal Learning Test and verbal fluency (P < .05). CONCLUSIONS Our results confirm the findings of previous studies of cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder. Untreated euthymic patients showed better cognitive performance than did patients on atypical antipsychotics. Some iatrogenic-pharmacologic effect, therefore, cannot be excluded, but quetiapine seemed to be less associated with impairment in measures of verbal memory than olanzapine or risperidone. We suggest to use drugs in bipolar disorder with a lower risk of cognitive adverse effects. However, randomized controlled trials are urgently needed to give a definite answer to this critical problem.

Neurocognitive impairment and psychosocial functioning in bipolar II disorder.

Solé B, Bonnin CM, Torrent C, Balanzá‐Martínez V, Tabarés‐Seisdedos R, Popovic D, Martínez‐Arán A, Vieta E. Neurocognitive impairment and psychosocial functioning in bipolar II disorder.

Psychoeducation for bipolar II disorder: An exploratory, 5-year outcome subanalysis

BACKGROUND Bipolar II represents a significant subgroup of bipolar patients. However, there is limited evidence regarding the efficacy of pharmacological and/or psychosocial therapies. METHOD Post-hoc analyses were undertaken using data on 20 (out of 120) patients who fulfilled DSM-IV criteria for BP II who had participated in a single-blind randomized controlled treatment trial (RCT) exploring the acute and long-term efficacy of group psychoeducation plus standard pharmacological treatment as compared with unstructured support groups plus standard pharmacological treatment. Eight BP II subjects had been randomized to a psychoeducation group and 12 to an unstructured support group. RESULTS Psychoeducated, as compared to control group bipolar II patients, had significantly better 5-year outcomes, with lower mean number of BP episodes (p<.02), hypomanic episodes (p<.03) and depressive episodes (p<.03), fewer days spent in mood episodes (p=.004) and higher mean levels of functioning (p<.05). CONCLUSIONS Although these findings should be treated with caution, it appears that psychoeducation plus medication can benefit bipolar II subjects. Dedicated treatment trials will need to clarify whether these therapies require modifications in duration and/or content to meet the needs of bipolar II patients.

Are bipolar II patients cognitively impaired? A systematic review

BACKGROUND There is evidence that bipolar disorder (BD) is associated with significant neurocognitive deficits and this occurs in individuals with BD type I (BD I) and with BD type II (BD II). Only a few studies have focused on cognitive impairment in BD II. The aim of this study was to describe the pattern of cognitive impairment in patients with BD II, in order to identify specific cognitive deficits that distinguish BD II from BD I patients as well as from healthy subjects. METHOD We performed a systematic review of the literature of neuropsychological studies of BD II published between 1980 and July 2009. Fourteen articles fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included in this review. RESULTS Main cognitive deficits found in BD II include working memory and some measures of executive functions (inhibitory control) and approximately half of the studies also detected verbal memory impairment. CONCLUSIONS There are subtle differences between the two subtypes regarding cognition. This may suggest neurobiological differences between the two subgroups which will be helpful in order to determine cognitive endophenotypes in BD subtypes.

Functional impairment in bipolar II disorder: Is it as disabling as bipolar I?

INTRODUCTION It is well established that patients with bipolar disorder experience functional impairment even in remission. Nevertheless, bipolar II disorder remains understudied because most investigations to date include only bipolar I patients or just a small sample of bipolar II patients, without explicitly comparing both subtypes of disorder. The main objective of the current report is to evaluate overall and multiple domains of functioning, specifically in bipolar II disorder compared to patients with bipolar I disorder and healthy subjects. METHODS 233 subjects from 3 groups were compared: bipolar I patients (n=106), bipolar II patients (n=66) and healthy controls (n=61). Bipolar patients meeting criteria of remission were recruited at the Hospital Clinic of Barcelona and at different study sites in Argentina. All participants were assessed with 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D), Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and the Functioning Assessment Short Test (FAST). Clinical and sociodemographic data were also recorded. RESULTS Both subgroups of patients, bipolar I and bipolar II, showed lower overall functioning (p<0.001) and in each domain of the FAST scale (all, p<0.001) when compared to the healthy control group. Tukey post hoc test revealed that bipolar II patients scored worse in the cognitive domain compared to bipolar I patients. However, after controlling for potential confounding variables, this difference disappeared and only older age (p<0.005) and HAM-D scores (p<0.001) remained significant. CONCLUSIONS Our results suggest that bipolar II patients are as disabled as bipolar I patients. This may be explained, in part, because bipolar II patients experience greater lifetime residual depressive symptoms than the bipolar I subgroup, which may have particular impact on cognitive domains of functioning.

Neurocognitive impairment across the bipolar spectrum.

Bipolar disorder is a severe mental illness that affects nearly 4.4% of the general population when bipolar spectrum disorders are taken into account. Neurocognitive impairment is thought to be a core deficit of this illness since it is present during euthymia. In fact, 40–60% of euthymic patients present with neurocognitive disturbances. Not only the clinical factors but also disturbances in neurocognition can influence the functional outcome of BD patients. Hence, further research is needed in order to clarify the relationship between these variables. Despite the growing body of evidence that has emerged during the last decade, no unique neurocognitive profile has been proposed yet for either BD subtype. The majority of the studies recluted heterogeneous samples (including both bipolar I and II) or focused on BD‐I patients only. The aim of this review is to give an overall picture of the main neurocognitive disturbances found in the bipolar spectrum and particularly in BD‐II, where the findings are more ambiguous. An extensive review of all the literature has been done regarding this subtype (from 1980 until July 2009). Data available until now suggest that deficits are present across the bipolar spectrum (BD‐I and BD‐II), but they seem slightly more severe in BD‐I. The extent to which either subtype share—or not—some similarities is still unknown. More studies are required but it would also be interesting to reach a consensus in the neuropsychological assessment of BD to facilitate comparisons between the different studies.