Sarah Stockton

Lithium toxicity profile: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Lithium is a widely used and effective treatment for mood disorders. There has been concern about its safety but no adequate synthesis of the evidence for adverse effects. We aimed to undertake a clinically informative, systematic toxicity profile of lithium. METHODS We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials and observational studies. We searched electronic databases, specialist journals, reference lists, textbooks, and conference abstracts. We used a hierarchy of evidence which considered randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control studies, and case reports that included patients with mood disorders given lithium. Outcome measures were renal, thyroid, and parathyroid function; weight change; skin disorders; hair disorders; and teratogenicity. FINDINGS We screened 5988 abstracts for eligibility and included 385 studies in the analysis. On average, glomerular filtration rate was reduced by -6·22 mL/min (95% CI -14·65 to 2·20, p=0·148) and urinary concentrating ability by 15% of normal maximum (weighted mean difference -158·43 mOsm/kg, 95% CI -229·78 to -87·07, p<0·0001). Lithium might increase risk of renal failure, but the absolute risk was small (18 of 3369 [0·5%] patients received renal replacement therapy). The prevalence of clinical hypothyroidism was increased in patients taking lithium compared with those given placebo (odds ratio [OR] 5·78, 95% CI 2·00-16·67; p=0·001), and thyroid stimulating hormone was increased on average by 4·00 iU/mL (95% CI 3·90-4·10, p<0·0001). Lithium treatment was associated with increased blood calcium (+0·09 mmol/L, 95% CI 0·02-0·17, p=0·009), and parathyroid hormone (+7·32 pg/mL, 3·42-11·23, p<0·0001). Patients receiving lithium gained more weight than did those receiving placebo (OR 1·89, 1·27-2·82, p=0·002), but not those receiving olanzapine (0·32, 0·21-0·49, p<0·0001). We recorded no significant increased risk of congenital malformations, alopecia, or skin disorders. INTERPRETATION Lithium is associated with increased risk of reduced urinary concentrating ability, hypothyroidism, hyperparathyroidism, and weight gain. There is little evidence for a clinically significant reduction in renal function in most patients, and the risk of end-stage renal failure is low. The risk of congenital malformations is uncertain; the balance of risks should be considered before lithium is withdrawn during pregnancy. Because of the consistent finding of a high prevalence of hyperparathyroidism, calcium concentrations should be checked before and during treatment. FUNDING National Institute for Health Research Programme Grant for Applied Research.

Lithium in the prevention of suicide in mood disorders: updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Objective To assess whether lithium has a specific preventive effect for suicide and self harm in people with unipolar and bipolar mood disorders. Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. Data sources Medline, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, CENTRAL, web based clinical trial registries, major textbooks, authors of important papers and other experts in the discipline, and websites of pharmaceutical companies that manufacture lithium or the comparator drugs (up to January 2013). Inclusion criteria Randomised controlled trials comparing lithium with placebo or active drugs in long term treatment for mood disorders. Review methods Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias and extracted data. The main outcomes were the number of people who completed suicide, engaged in deliberate self harm, and died from any cause. Results 48 randomised controlled trials (6674 participants, 15 comparisons) were included. Lithium was more effective than placebo in reducing the number of suicides (odds ratio 0.13, 95% confidence interval 0.03 to 0.66) and deaths from any cause (0.38, 0.15 to 0.95). No clear benefits were observed for lithium compared with placebo in preventing deliberate self harm (0.60, 0.27 to 1.32). In unipolar depression, lithium was associated with a reduced risk of suicide (0.36, 0.13 to 0.98) and also the number of total deaths (0.13, 0.02 to 0.76) compared with placebo. When lithium was compared with each active individual treatment a statistically significant difference was found only with carbamazepine for deliberate self harm. Lithium tended to be generally better than the other active comparators, with small statistical variation between the results. Conclusions Lithium is an effective treatment for reducing the risk of suicide in people with mood disorders. Lithium may exert its antisuicidal effects by reducing relapse of mood disorder, but additional mechanisms should also be considered because there is some evidence that lithium decreases aggression and possibly impulsivity, which might be another mechanism mediating the antisuicidal effect.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of antimanic drugs in acute mania: a multiple-treatments meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Conventional meta-analyses have shown inconsistent results for efficacy of pharmacological treatments for acute mania. We did a multiple-treatments meta-analysis, which accounted for both direct and indirect comparisons, to assess the effects of all antimanic drugs. METHODS We systematically reviewed 68 randomised controlled trials (16,073 participants) from Jan 1, 1980, to Nov 25, 2010, which compared any of the following pharmacological drugs at therapeutic dose range for the treatment of acute mania in adults: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, valproate, gabapentin, haloperidol, lamotrigine, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, topiramate, and ziprasidone. The main outcomes were the mean change on mania rating scales and the number of patients who dropped out of the allocated treatment at 3 weeks. Analysis was done by intention to treat. FINDINGS Haloperidol (standardised mean difference [SMD] -0·56 [95% CI -0·69 to -0·43]), risperidone (-0·50 [-0·63 to -0·38), olanzapine (-0·43 [-0·54 to -0·32], lithium (-0·37 [-0·63 to -0·11]), quetiapine (-0·37 [-0·51 to -0·23]), aripiprazole (-0·37 [-0·51 to -0·23]), carbamazepine (-0·36 [-0·60 to -0·11], asenapine (-0·30 [-0·53 to -0·07]), valproate (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·04]), and ziprasidone (-0·20 [-0·37 to -0·03]) were significantly more effective than placebo, whereas gabapentin, lamotrigine, and topiramate were not. Haloperidol had the highest number of significant differences and was significantly more effective than lithium (SMD -0·19 [95% CI -0·36 to -0·01]), quetiapine (-0·19 [-0·37 to 0·01]), aripiprazole (-0·19 [-0·36 to -0·02]), carbamazepine (-0·20 [-0·36 to -0·01]), asenapine (-0·26 [-0·52 to 0·01]), valproate (-0·36 [-0·56 to -0·15]), ziprasidone -0·36 [-0·56 to -0·15]), lamotrigine (-0·48 [-0·77 to -0·19]), topiramate (-0·63 [-0·84 to -0·43]), and gabapentin (-0·88 [-1·40 to -0·36]). Risperidone and olanzapine had a very similar profile of comparative efficacy, being more effective than valproate, ziprasidone, lamotrigine, topiramate, and gabapentin. Olanzapine, risperidone, and quetiapine led to significantly fewer discontinuations than did lithium, lamotrigine, placebo, topiramate, and gabapentin. INTERPRETATION Overall, antipsychotic drugs were significantly more effective than mood stabilisers. Risperidone, olanzapine, and haloperidol should be considered as among the best of the available options for the treatment of manic episodes. These results should be considered in the development of clinical practice guidelines. FUNDING None.

Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND Lithium is the established standard in the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder, but several new drugs have been assessed for this indication. We did a network meta-analysis to investigate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of available pharmacological treatment strategies for bipolar disorder. METHODS We systematically searched Embase, Medline, PreMedline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials published before June 28, 2013, that compared active treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo), either as monotherapy or as add-on treatment, for at least 12 weeks. The primary outcomes were the number of participants with recurrence of any mood episode, and the number of participants who discontinued the trial because of adverse events. We assessed efficacy and tolerability of bipolar treatments using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. FINDINGS We screened 114 potentially eligible studies and identified 33 randomised controlled trials, published between 1970 and 2012, that examined 17 treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo) in 6846 participants. Participants assigned to all assessed treatments had a significantly lower risk of any mood relapse or recurrence compared with placebo, except for those assigned to aripiprazole (risk ratio [RR] 0·62, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0·38-1·03), carbamazepine (RR 0·68, 0·44-1·06), imipramine (RR 0·95, 0·66-1·36), and paliperidone (RR 0·84, 0·56-1·24). Lamotrigine and placebo were significantly better tolerated than carbamazepine (lamotrigine, RR 5·24, 1·07-26·32; placebo, RR 3·60, 1·04-12·94), lithium (RR 3·76, 1·13-12·66; RR 2·58, 1·33-5·39), or lithium plus valproate (RR 5·95, 1·02-33·33; RR 4·09, 1·01-16·96). INTERPRETATION Although most of the drugs analysed were more efficacious than placebo and generally well tolerated, differences in the quality of evidence and the side-effect profiles should be taken into consideration by clinicians and patients. In view of the efficacy in prevention of both manic episode and depressive episode relapse or recurrence and the better quality of the supporting evidence, lithium should remain the first-line treatment when prescribing a relapse-prevention drug in patients with bipolar disorder, notwithstanding its tolerability profile. FUNDING None.

Initiatives to shorten duration of untreated psychosis: systematic review

BACKGROUND Long duration of untreated psychosis (DUP) is common and associated with poor outcomes. Strategies to enhance early detection of first-episode psychosis have been advocated. AIMS To evaluate initiatives for early detection of psychosis. METHOD Systematic review of available evidence on the effectiveness of early detection initiatives to reduce the DUP. RESULTS The review included 11 studies which evaluated 8 early detection initiatives. Evidence suggests that general practitioner education campaigns and dedicated early intervention services do not by themselves reduce DUP or generate more treated cases. Evidence for multifocus initiatives is mixed: intensive campaigns targeting the general public as well as relevant professionals may be needed. No studies evaluated initiatives targeting young people or professionals from non-health organisations. CONCLUSIONS How early detection can be achieved is not clear. Evidence is most promising for intensive public awareness campaigns: these require organisation and resourcing at a regional or national level. More good-quality studies are needed to address gaps in knowledge.

Comparative efficacy and acceptability of first-generation and second-generation antidepressants in the acute treatment of major depression: protocol for a network meta-analysis

Introduction Many antidepressants are indicated for the treatment of major depression. Two network meta-analyses have provided the most comprehensive assessments to date, accounting for both direct and indirect comparisons; however, these reported conflicting interpretation of results. Here, we present a protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed at updating the evidence base and comparing all second-generation as well as selected first-generation antidepressants in terms of efficacy and acceptability in the acute treatment of major depression. Methods and analysis We will include all randomised controlled trials reported as double-blind and comparing one active drug with another or with placebo in the acute phase treatment of major depression in adults. We are interested in comparing the following active agents: agomelatine, amitriptyline, bupropion, citalopram, clomipramine, desvenlafaxine, duloxetine, escitalopram, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, levomilnacipran, milnacipran, mirtazapine, nefazodone, paroxetine, reboxetine, sertraline, trazodone, venlafaxine, vilazodone and vortioxetine. The main outcomes will be the proportion of patients who responded to or dropped out of the allocated treatment. Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least two independent reviewers. We will conduct a random effects network meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome and obtain a comprehensive ranking of all treatments. To rank the various treatments for each outcome, we will use the surface under the cumulative ranking curve and the mean ranks. We will employ local as well as global methods to evaluate consistency. We will fit our model in a Bayesian framework using OpenBUGS, and produce results and various checks in Stata and R. We will also assess the quality of evidence contributing to network estimates of the main outcomes with the GRADE framework. Ethics and dissemination This review does not require ethical approval. PROSPERO registration number CRD42012002291.

Biological rationale and potential clinical use of gabapentin and pregabalin in bipolar disorder, insomnia and anxiety: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction Gabapentin has been extensively prescribed off-label for psychiatric indications, with little established evidence of efficacy. Gabapentin and pregabalin, a very similar drug with the same mechanism of action, bind to a subunit of voltage-dependent calcium channels which are implicated in the aetiopathogenesis of bipolar disorder, anxiety and insomnia. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to collect and critically appraise all the available evidence about the efficacy and tolerability of gabapentin and pregabalin in the treatment of bipolar disorder, insomnia and anxiety. Methods and analysis We will include all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) reported as double-blind and comparing gabapentin or pregabalin with placebo or any other active pharmacological treatment (any preparation, dose, frequency, route of delivery or setting) in patients with bipolar disorder, anxiety or insomnia. For consideration of adverse effects (tolerability), single-blind or open-label RCTs and non-randomised evidence will also be summarised. The main outcomes will be efficacy (measured as dichotomous and continuous outcome) and acceptability (proportion of patients who dropped out of the allocated treatment). Published and unpublished studies will be sought through relevant database searches, trial registries and websites; all reference selection and data extraction will be conducted by at least 2 independent reviewers. We will conduct a random-effects meta-analysis to synthesise all evidence for each outcome. Heterogeneity between studies will be investigated by the I2 statistic. Data from included studies will be entered into a funnel plot for investigation of small-study effects. No subgroup analysis will be undertaken, but we will carry out sensitivity analyses about combination treatment, psychiatric comorbidity, use of rescue medications and fixed versus random-effects model. Ethics and dissemination This review does not require ethical approval. This protocol has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42016041802). The results of the systematic review will be disseminated via publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

Epidemiology of Mental Health Attendances at Emergency Departments: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background The characteristics of Emergency Department (ED) attendances due to mental or behavioural health disorders need to be described to enable appropriate development of services. We aimed to describe the epidemiology of mental health-related ED attendances within health care systems free at the point of access, including clinical reason for presentation, previous service use, and patient sociodemographic characteristics. Method Systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies describing ED attendances by patients with common mental health conditions. Findings 18 studies from seven countries met eligibility criteria. Patients attending due to mental or behavioural health disorders accounted for 4% of ED attendances; a third were due to self-harm or suicidal ideation. 58.1% of attendees had a history of psychiatric illness and up to 58% were admitted. The majority of studies were single site and of low quality so results must be interpreted cautiously. Conclusions Prevalence studies of mental health-related ED attendances are required to enable the development of services to meet specific needs.