What's Up with Bipolar Disorder?
Abstract
In this brief update on bipolar disorder (BD), I discuss the classic definitions of BD and the revisions to those definitions that are proposed for DSM-5. Proposed revisions include the addition of a mixed features specifier that could be added to any mood disorder diagnosis to capture mixed symptoms, the addition of activity or energy as an “and” to mood for Criterion A of hypomanic and manic episodes, maintaining the Criterion A for hypomanic episode duration at 4 days, and a revision of BD not otherwise specified to be more specific in definition. An overview of recent developments in medication treatment is discussed. Major breakthroughs in treatment innovation for BD have occurred in the last 60 years (lithium), 30 years (anticonvulsants), 20 years (U.S. use of clozapine and early second-generation antipsychotics), and even 10 years (more second-generation antipsychotics and lamotrigine). Critical questions for all categories of BD still remain unanswered. The need for further treatment studies and other therapies addressing patients with bipolar I disorder and bipolar II disorder is reviewed. Empiric and prospective treatment studies are needed to add to the already available literature to more formally define and explore treatment options for patients with BD not otherwise specified, a significant number of people with potentially severe illnesses or at risk for developing more severe illnesses. In brief, the recent push toward personalized medicine, a reasonable and important direction for the next leap in treatment both for medicine and psychiatry, is discussed. There is optimism that newer tools including whole genome studies, protein and mRNA expression, epigenetics, stem cell work, and tissue culture systems will provide the avenue not only to increase our understanding at a cellular level of disease mechanisms but also to provide individualized medicine. Over the past 40 years, significant progress has been made in our knowledge and understanding of this complex disorder. However, gaps still exist in our understanding of the biological causes and the expression, of BD and scientific efforts in biological and new treatment development must continue to more fully understand this disorder and to adequately treat patients.
In this update, I will discuss how bipolar disorder has been classically defined and the revisions to those definitions that are being proposed for DSM-5. Then, I will briefly discuss several of the treatment innovations made over the past 60 years, including treatment guidelines and second-generation antipsychotics (SGAs) used as mood stabilizers. Finally, I will touch upon a few innovations on the horizon for the treatment of people with bipolar disorder.
Current and proposed DSM-5 definitions of bipolar disorder
Bipolar I disorder
How do we define bipolar disorder (BD)? There is well-established historical and worldwide recognition of bipolar I disorder (BDI), the type of BD associated with manic episodes (1–3). Classically these episodes are not small perturbations of energy, mood, impulsivity, and action but, before the availability of treatment, manic episodes could lead to death due to physical exhaustion (2). The recurrent nature and severity of BDI is now better understood than in earlier times (1, 2, 4). After two clear episodes of mania, lifelong medication is recommended because of the greater than 95% probability that there will be a recurrence (2, 5). Mania alone (unipolar mania), is a relatively rare phenomenon accounting for less than 5% of all patients with BDI; and the majority of individuals with BDI also experience periods of depression.
Bipolar II disorder
There is now greater understanding and appreciation of the severity of BD type II (BDII), an illness with a predominance of depression, periods of mood lability, and some degree of hypomania (2, 3, 6).
Part of this increased awareness of BDII occurred as more medications became available for treatment of BD in the 1990s, and for the first time treatment guidelines began to emerge (7–9). The emergence of treatment guidelines brought clarity and focus to the essential absence of data on treatment management of patients with BDII in the late 1990s. Although seemingly it is not possible to develop guidelines without data, most early efforts, including those of APA (7–9) and the Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) (10, 11), recommended following the same guidelines for BDII as for BDI. In addition, formal studies of medication treatment of BDII are limited, and psychosocial therapies are rarely if ever directly compared with medications (2, 6, 12).
This distinct subset of patients with BDII was first clearly identified and validated a number of years ago (6, 13–15). Historically, in some sense BDII was seen as a “less severe” illness because of the absence of manic episodes. More recently, the severity, chronicity, impact on quality of life, and suicidal risk of this population have emerged in a number of studies supporting a different illness but of essentially equal severity as BDI (6, 15–18). In particular, the depression burden is significant and often chronic (19). Despite the improved recognition and studies of individuals with BDII, treatment studies have lagged behind. Debate continues as to the specificity of BDII disorder despite scientific efforts supporting reliability and validity (20).
Bipolar spectrum
Not as clear as BDI or BDII is the often stated “bipolar spectrum” or subthreshold bipolarity. When does a mild, less impairing, and less distressing degree of mood lability or depression become an illness appropriate to manage with medication and other tools?
The large group of patients currently classified as BD not otherwise specified (BD NOS) are poorly defined as a category. The current DSM-IV-TR provides limited guidance to specify individuals in this group, but rather refers to “examples include” (3). The important consideration of when symptoms become an illness or disorder must, in this group, be assessed not only by the presence or absence of a symptom but also by the degree of distress and impact on function.
These definitions are important because they provide a way to define a group, be specific in treatment approaches, and work to understand the underlying causes of the cluster(s) of symptoms defined as BD. In the new DSM-5, efforts are underway to improve the specificity and sensitivity of the diagnosis of BD and related diagnoses.
Depending on which epidemiology study is examined and how “soft” bipolarity is defined, from 3%–6% of the population reports bipolar-type symptoms and falls into this category (21–23). Should all of these people be considered to have BD? Should all of these people take medications? Are some of these individuals representative of a group for whom complementary treatments could be critical and should be studied? We do not know the answer to these questions.
DSM-5—proposed revisions
Final revisions of DSM-5 are still a work in progress; however, the Bipolar Disorder Sub-Workgroup in collaboration with the full Mood Disorder Workgroup for the DSM-5 has proposed to update BD and depressive disorder in a number of ways. This set of proposals is being evaluated by multiple committees, and many of the proposed changes are still undergoing feasibility testing in the field. What follows are the current proposals. Additional information about DSM-5 can be found at www.dsm5.org.
Duration of hypomania
One of the key issues discussed by the Mood Disorder Workgroup was whether to preserve the current duration criterion of 4 days for hypomania or to shorten the criterion in DSM-5 to 2 days. Extensive review of the literature and new evidence from a large multisite study supports the continuance at 4 days (22–24). The Mood Disorders Workgroup for DSM-5 is making the recommendation to maintain Criterion A for an episode of hypomania at 4 days' duration. The proposal is as follows:
A distinct period of abnormally and persistently elevated, expansive, or irritable mood and abnormally and persistently increased activity or energy, lasting at least 4 days and present most of the day, nearly every day, that is clearly different from the usual non-depressed mood (24).
Extensive consideration was given to decreasing the number of days to define a hypomanic episode. If the duration were decreased for the defining of an episode of hypomania to fewer days, it was estimated that the “prevalence” would increase by 2–3 times (26). There was a lack of compelling data to change the duration criteria (27); in fact, many large studies examine subthreshold bipolarity without consideration of duration (28–30). External validators used to support the specificity of a diagnosis or disorder support maintaining the hypomania duration criterion at 4 days (22, 23). The recent “BRIDGE” study supporting this criterion is a large international study of patients currently experiencing a major depression episode for which an evaluation was made of various cut points for duration of hypomania between 1, 2–3, and 4–6 days. External validators, including first-degree relatives with a mood disorder, early adult onset, recurrent mood episodes, mood lability, seasonality, and history of suicide attempts support greater specificity of BDII by maintaining a 4-day duration for a hypomanic episode (22, 23). There was a striking linear relationship between many of the external validators evaluated and the duration of the hypomanic symptoms. For example, the percentage of the population reporting a family history of mood disorders increased as number of days of hypomania increased. The difference between requiring 2–3 days versus 4–6 days in these validators was notable, in many cases improving by 20% or more.
Although BDII is well-recognized and studied in North America, this diagnosis is still classified and recognized by the ICD-10 (31) as “Bipolar Other.” Shortening the criterion duration of hypomania could decrease the specificity of the diagnosis and add to the periodic skepticism regarding the integrity and validity of bipolar II as a separate diagnostic category (6, 12, 20).
Mixed features specifier
Perhaps one of the most significant proposals for DSM-5 is the change under consideration for mixed mania or mixed episodes in the mood disorders. Currently, mixed episode, often referred to as mixed mania, is defined as an individual meeting the full criteria for both mania and depression in the same time period and experiencing symptoms relatively simultaneously (3).
Since DSM-IV stated these criteria in 1994, the relative rarity of individuals meeting the full criteria juxtaposed to the high frequency in BD of mania with some degree of depression symptoms or depression with hypomanic symptoms has become clear and alternative definitions have been proposed (28, 32–40). In particular, the occurrence of mania, hypomania, or depression with subthreshold nonoverlapping symptoms of the opposite pole is at least as common as that of the “pure” classic euphoric mania or depression; furthermore, awareness of mixed symptoms may be important for treatment choices and carry potential implications for the course of illness (28, 41–43). The change proposed in DSM-5 is to capture mixed symptoms as a mixed features specifier (25) (Table 1).
 |
Table 1. Mixed Features Specifiers Criterion A through F
Importantly, this specifier is proposed to apply not only to patients with BD but also to patients with major depressive disorder (MDD). This change is proposed on the basis of recent studies, showing by conservative definitions, that 20% of patients experiencing a depressed episode experience subthreshold hypomanic symptoms (28–30). A recent study of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Depression Collaborative cohort suggests that such symptoms may in some cases be predictive of a switch to BD (28–30). If more liberal definitions of subthreshold hypomania are used, such as requiring fewer numbers of symptoms, then the incidence goes higher and closer to 40% of major depressive episodes have some degree of bipolar hypomanic symptoms (21–23, 28).
It is also important to note that the proposed symptoms from the opposite pole are nonoverlapping. Symptoms for which it is more difficult to discern causality and define whether they are related to depression or mania, such as irritability or distractibility, were not included.
If this current proposal is accepted and becomes part of DSM-5, it will be the first time the bridge between BD and MDD will be formally recognized. Some studies suggest that individuals with MDD with mixed features may be individuals at greater risk for developing BD in the next decade (28–30). Little well-controlled research on treatment of patients with MDD and mixed features has been completed, although naturalistic observations raise the issue whether antidepressants would be a first-line treatment or not. The answer can only be “maybe” before formal treatment trials are performed.
Hypo/manic Criterion A: addition of activity/energy
The Mood Disorders Workgroup for the DSM-5 is making the recommendation for the addition of “activity or energy” to Criterion A for hypomanic and manic episodes. The proposal for the updated criterion is as follows:
A distinct period of abnormally and persistently elevated, expansive, or irritable mood ANDabnormally and persistently increased activity or energy. Symptom lists (Criterion B) would be essentially not changed (25).
With Criterion B, it is currently possible to meet DSM-IV-TR criteria for bipolar I disorder without a change in activity or energy. The addition of requiring increased activity/energy for Criterion A will make explicit the requirement that this hallmark symptom of mania and hypomania be present to make the diagnosis. Addition of this feature is supported by a number of studies suggesting that activity or energy is at least as important as mood, and some studies argue that activity and energy are more important than mood (2, 22, 23, 44–49).
Bipolar disorder not otherwise specified revised to include specific types
Still under discussion for DSM-5 is how all “not otherwise specified” categories will be captured and coded. The Mood Disorders Workgroup for the DSM-5 proposes to revise BD not otherwise specified (BD NOS) to allow subcategories to be coded and to be specific in definition. This is an important change from DSM-IV-TR, in which not otherwise specified was defined by “examples include.” This proposed change will allow the capture of the phenomenon of patients experiencing hypomanic symptoms with notable change from usual behavior that are less than 4 days in duration or of a lower symptom count but full duration than is required to meet the criteria for a full hypomanic episode. In contrast to the proposed mixed features specifier (25, 50), for which symptoms occur simultaneously, symptoms for BD NOS by definition occur at separate times (25, 50) (Table 2).
 |
Table 2. Bipolar Disorder Not Otherwise Specified Codeable Categories
Treatment innovation
Major breakthroughs have occurred in the last 60 years (lithium), 30 years (anticonvulsants), 20 years (U.S. use of clozapine and early SGAs), and even 10 years (more SGAs and lamotrigine). The rise of SGAs and the attendant marketing, media, and medical attention brought a level of focus to BD that had never been seen. The traditional schizophrenia-based markets became overshadowed by the broadly defined BD market. First, the discovery that 50% or more of patients in a BDI manic episode, including those without psychotic features, responded to SGAs and without the side effects of the first-generation antipsychotics, paved the way to consider this group of medications for broader use (51–53). Although use of the first-generation antipsychotics to manage BD was common before the development of SGAs, the utility of these agents was limited by the long-term side effect profile and limited efficacy, if not worsening of depression (2). We observed a sea change when evidence of the efficacy of SGAs in depression was shown and our concept of the uses of SGAs in medication management expanded (54, 55).
The new and important concept of SGAs as both antimanic and in some cases antidepressant emerged apart from the concept of antipsychotics primarily treating psychotic symptoms. That SGAs have an impact on mood unrelated to the presence of psychotic features is notable. However, for BDI we have not satisfactorily solved the issues of depression or residual depression. The limit of our evidence base is quickly reached, and, in particular, the evidence rarely approaches the often complex treatment regimens seen clinically (56, 57). The impetus to extend these evidence bases is limited by funding constraints. Conservatively, about 2% of the U.S. population has BDI, BDII, or more severe bipolar spectrum illness. Yet we reach the limit of having multiple choices for evidence-based treatments almost as soon as we pass acute mania for BDI, and acute depression studies, although important and groundbreaking, focus on monotherapy and provide few options.
Much of this increased knowledge was driven by the development of medications for U.S. Food and Drug Administration approval and thus by pharmaceutical companies. Historically pharmaceutical companies shine in drug development, but the exploration of the full potential of a medication requires federal and other funding sources. When treatment studies are driven primarily by the needs of bringing a medication to market, it is unlikely that a full range of studies will ever be completed to explore the complex medication regimens seen in clinical practice. Recent efforts to explore more naturalistic treatments were supported by NIMH and the Stanley Medical Research Institute.
These extensive pharmaceutical development programs were juxtaposed to NIMH funding of large multisite clinical networks supporting studies addressing treatment of MDD, BD, and schizophrenia. Some key results have emerged from these studies. In the NIMH Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD) studies, our understanding of the limited response to antidepressants was extended, awareness of co-occurring conditions in BD was enhanced, and appreciation of the overall symptoms and course of illness was increased (35, 58–61).
The Stanley Medical Research Institute funded the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network, now known as the Bipolar Treatment Network, from whose work important understanding emerged about BD (62, 63). From this Foundation-funded, long-term study, key factors were observed, such as the association of early abuse with greater severity of illness, including an earlier onset, complex symptom presentation, and the striking co-occurrence of additional axis I disorders (32, 64, 65). In addition, some of the earliest recognition of the impact of subthreshold depression symptoms and both the presence and impact of subthreshold manic symptoms during a depressive episode were noted (66, 67).
Treatment studies have slowed with the decrease of new drug development, leaving the study of better and varied uses of current medication yet to be done and key questions yet to be answered. For BDII, some of the most fundamental questions are as yet unaddressed. Should all patients with BDII receive medication? How does lithium compare with an antidepressant for acute depression? What is an appropriate long-term treatment program for BDII (66, 67)? There have been a number of studies by Amsterdam and colleagues (69, 70), supporting the theory that for at least some individuals with BDII an antidepressant may be the correct medication choice. Likewise, there are literature findings supporting lithium and more recently quetiapine as key treatment options (2, 6, 71).
The critical clinical questions relating to BDI and BDII are extensive, and although some evidence exists for the potential needs of each disorder, limited evidence exists to address the full range of patient needs. It is critical to maintain the awareness that these are severe and lifelong illnesses associated with significant suffering and personal, family, and societal impact. It is important to correctly diagnose and not to overdiagnose because of a few symptoms or to underdiagnose because of a lack of recognition of hypomanic or manic periods. Further studies are needed in medication and other therapies addressing patients with BDI and BDII.
The questions for BD NOS, arguably accounting for the largest group of people with potentially severe or at risk for developing more severe illnesses, are yet to be posed (21–23). Empiric and prospective treatment studies are needed to add to the already available literature to more formally define and explore treatment options for patients with BD NOS.
Future innovations
There is a current push toward personalized medicine, arguably a key and important direction for the next leap in treatment both for medicine and psychiatry in general. In some studies and new experimental models, work is being done to further this emerging field (72, 73). There is optimism that newer tools including whole genome studies, protein and mRNA expression, epigenetics, stem cell work, and “personalized” tissue culture systems will provide the avenue to not only increase our understanding at a cellular level of disease mechanisms but also provide individualized medicine.
These efforts are, without doubt, central and part of the revolution we are currently experiencing in medicine. However, in the process of the leap to genes and basic cellular components we have left behind the patients currently dealing with these illnesses and an inadequate evidence base to guide treatment. It is clear that both approaches are needed. Federally supported clinical trials are still needed, just as the scientific agenda is advanced addressing underlying mechanisms and developing personalized medicine options. Are there clues indicating other avenues that could substantially affect BD and MDD? Rather than just medications, are there other modifying biological factors that could have an impact on the course of illness? The article in this issue of FOCUS by Dr. Yang reviews recent studies providing clues into the biology of BD.
Possible role of inflammatory and cellular processes in bipolar disorder
One of the emerging areas of medicine is the putative role of inflammation throughout the body, including inflammation in the development of cardiovascular disease and inflammatory causes of narcolepsy (74–76). Results from The Netherlands of a putative mRNA inflammatory signature observed to be significantly different in healthy control subjects versus patients with BD suggest one future direction deserving of further explanation of bipolar disorder pathophysiology (77, 78). Just as secondary messenger systems have been implicated as having a role in the system of BD including destabilization—an imbalance corrected in some with lithium—potential mitochondrial dysfunction, a cellular dysfunction, may play a key role in BD (79–81). It is to be hoped that as our understanding of these important fields increases, it will open the way to novel treatments. Assessing this type of issue may, in fact, be the ultimate personalized medicine because each individual may have a unique, detailed inflammatory or cellular dysfunction profile.
Summary
An overview of changes proposed for DSM-5 and the state of treatment studies for BD was provided. The newer fields not touched on in this update are significant. We can anticipate revolution in the role of epigenetics in our thinking regarding the biology of BDs. Findings in this field are likely to be very much a part of the revolution of not just psychiatry. On the other side of this explosion of study, there are targeted interventions yet to be developed that may modify the expression of genes, profoundly changing the rate of development and course of BD.
Over the past 40 years significant progress has been made in our knowledge and understanding of this complex disorder. Valuable treatment interventions are now available, and many of these treatment options have been developed in the last 20 years. However, a gap exists in our understanding of the biological causes and the expression of the cluster of symptoms termed BD. Scientific efforts must continue in biological aspects and new treatment development to more fully understand this disorder and to adequately treat patients.
1. Kraepelin E: Manic-Depressive Illness and Paranoia. Edited by Robertson G, Barclay, RBT. Edinburgh, Scotland, E & S Livingstone, 1921Google Scholar
2. Goodwin FK, Jamison KR: Manic-Depressive Illness: Bipolar Disorders and Recurrent Depression, 2nd ed. New York, Oxford University Press, 2007Google Scholar
3. American Psychiatric Association: Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., text revision. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing, 2000Google Scholar
4. Post RM: Mechanisms of illness progression in the recurrent affective disorders. Neurotox Res 2010; 18:256–271Crossref, Google Scholar
5. Suppes T, Baldessarini RJ, Faedda GL, Tohen M: Risk of recurrence following discontinuation of lithium treatment in bipolar disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991; 48:1082–1088Crossref, Google Scholar
6. Suppes T, Dennehy EB: Evidence-based long-term treatment of bipolar II disorder. J Clin Psychiatry 2002; 63(suppl 10):29–33Google Scholar
7. Sachs GS, Printz DJ, Kahn DA, Carpenter D, Docherty JP: The Expert Consensus Guideline Series: medication treatment of bipolar disorder 2000. Postgrad Med 2000; Spec No.:1–104Google Scholar
8. American Psychiatric Association: Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder. Am J Psychiatry 1994; 151(12 suppl):1–36Google Scholar
9. American Psychiatric Association: Practice guideline for the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder (revision). Am J Psychiatry 2002; 159(4 suppl):1–50Crossref, Google Scholar
10. Yatham LN, Kennedy SH, O'Donovan C, Parikh S, MacQueen G, McIntyre R, Sharma V, Ravindran A, Young LT, Young AH, Alda M, Milev R, Vieta E, Calabrese JR, Berk M, Ha K, Kapczinski F: Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: consensus and controversies. Bipolar Disord 2005; 7(suppl 3):5–69Google Scholar
11. Vieta E, Nolen WA, Grunze H, Licht RW, Goodwin G: A European perspective on the Canadian guidelines for bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2005; 7. suppl 3:73–76Crossref, Google Scholar
12. Simpson SG, McMahon FJ, McInnis MG, MacKinnon DF, Edwin D, Folstein SE, DePaulo JR: Diagnostic reliability of bipolar II disorder. Arch General Psychiatry 2002; 59:736–740Crossref, Google Scholar
13. Dunner DL: A review of the diagnostic status of “bipolar ii” for the DSM-IV Work Group on Mood Disorders. Depression 1993; 1:2–10Crossref, Google Scholar
14. Coryell W, Keller M, Endicott J, Andreasen N, Clayton P, Hirschfeld R: Bipolar II illness: course and outcome over a five-year period. Psychol Med 1989; 19:129–141Crossref, Google Scholar
15. Coryell W, Endicott J, Maser JD, Keller MB, Leon AC, Akiskal HS: Long-term stability of polarity distinctions in the affective disorders. Am J Psychiatry 1995; 152:385–390Crossref, Google Scholar
16. Vieta E, Gasto C, Otero A, Nieto E, Vallejo J: Differential features between bipolar I and bipolar II disorder. Compr Psychiatry 1997; 38:98–101Crossref, Google Scholar
17. Ruggero CJ, Chelminski I, Young D, Zimmerman M: Psychosocial impairment associated with bipolar II disorder. J Affect Disord 2007; 104:53–60Crossref, Google Scholar
18. MacQueen GM, Young LT: Bipolar II disorder: symptoms, course, and response to treatment. Psychiatr Serv 2001; 52:358–361Crossref, Google Scholar
19. Rosa AR, Reinares M, Michalak EE, Bonnin CM, Sole B, Franco C, Comes M, Torrent C, Kapczinski F, Vieta E: Functional impairment and disability across mood states in bipolar disorder. Value Health 2010; 13:984–988Crossref, Google Scholar
20. Spence D: Bad medicine: bipolar II disorder. BMJ 2011; 342:d2767Crossref, Google Scholar
21. Merikangas KR, Jin R, He JP, Kessler RC, Lee S, Sampson NA, Viana MC, Andrade LH, Hu C, Karam EG, Ladea M, Medina-Mora ME, Ono Y, Posada-Villa J, Sagar R, Wells JE, Zarkov Z: Prevalence and correlates of bipolar spectrum disorder in the world mental health survey initiative. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011; 68:241–251Crossref, Google Scholar
22. Angst J, Gamma A, Bowden CL, Azorin JM, Perugi G, Vieta E, Young AH: Diagnostic criteria for bipolarity based on an international sample of 5,635 patients with DSM-IV major depressive episodes. Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci (in press)Google Scholar
23. Angst J, Azorin JM, Bowden CL, Perugi G, Vieta E, Gamma A, Young AH: Prevalence and characteristics of undiagnosed bipolar disorders in patients with a major depressive episode: the BRIDGE study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2011; 68:791–798Crossref, Google Scholar
24. Suppes T:
25. American Psychiatric Association: DSM-5 development. http://www.dsm5.orgGoogle Scholar
26. Bauer M, Grof P, Rasgon NL, Marsh W, Munoz RA, Sagduyu K, Alda M, Quiroz D, Glenn T, Baethge C, Whybrow PC: Self-reported data from patients with bipolar disorder: impact on minimum episode length for hypomania. J Affect Disord 2006; 96:101–105Crossref, Google Scholar
27. Judd LL, Akiskal HS, Schettler PJ, Coryell W, Endicott J, Maser JD, Solomon DA, Leon AC, Keller MB: A prospective investigation of the natural history of the long-term weekly symptomatic status of bipolar II disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2003; 60:261–269Crossref, Google Scholar
28. Zimmermann P, Brückl T, Nocon A, Pfister H, Lieb R, Wittchen HU, Holsboer F, Angst J: Heterogeneity of DSM-IV major depressive disorder as a consequence of subthreshold bipolarity. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009; 66:1341–1352Crossref, Google Scholar
29. Fiedorowicz JG, Endicott J, Leon AC, Solomon DA, Keller MB, Coryell WH: Subthreshold hypomanic symptoms in progression from unipolar major depression to bipolar disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2011; 168:40–48Crossref, Google Scholar
30. Angst J, Cui L, Swendsen J, Rothen S, Cravchik A, Kessler RC, Merikangas KR: Major depressive disorder with subthreshold bipolarity in the National Comorbidity Survey Replication. Am J Psychiatry 2010; 167:1194–1201Crossref, Google Scholar
31. World Health Organization: The ICD-10. Classification of Mental and Behavioral Disorders. Washington, DC, American Psychiatric Publishing, 1994Google Scholar
32. Suppes T, Mintz J, McElroy SL, Altshuler LL, Kupka RW, Frye MA, Keck PE Jr, Nolen WA, Leverich GS, Grunze H, Rush AJ, Post RM: Mixed hypomania in 908 patients with bipolar disorder evaluated prospectively in the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Treatment Network: a sex-specific phenomenon. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2005; 62:1089–1096Crossref, Google Scholar
33. Suppes T, Hellemann G, Frye M, McElroy S, Nolen W, Kupka R, Keck P, Post R: Mixed depression in bipolar disorder: prevalence rate and clinical correlates during naturalistic follow up, in
34. McElroy SL, Keck PE Jr, Pope HG Jr, Hudson JI, Faedda GL, Swann AC: Clinical and research implications of the diagnosis of dysphoric or mixed mania or hypomania. Am J Psychiatry 1992; 149:1633–1644Crossref, Google Scholar
35. Goldberg JF, Perlis RH, Bowden CL, Thase ME, Miklowitz DJ, Marangell LB, Calabrese JR, Nierenberg AA, Sachs GS: Manic symptoms during depressive episodes in 1,380 patients with bipolar disorder: findings from the STEP-BD. Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166:173–181Crossref, Google Scholar
36. Frye M, Hellemann G, Suppes T, McElroy S, Grunze H, Altshuler L, Keck P, Kupka R, Nolen W, Leverich G, Post R: Prevalence rate of mixed depression and its impact on remission: a controlled evaluation, in
37. Dilsaver SC, Benazzi F, Akiskal HS: Mixed states: the most common outpatient presentation of bipolar depressed adolescents? Psychopathology 2005; 38:268–272Crossref, Google Scholar
38. Benazzi F, Akiskal HS: Delineating bipolar II mixed states in the Ravenna-San Diego collaborative study: the relative prevalence and diagnostic significance of hypomanic features during major depressive episodes. J Affect Disord 2001; 67:115–122Crossref, Google Scholar
39. Benazzi F: Bipolar II depressive mixed state: finding a useful definition. Compr Psychiatry 2003; 44:21–27Crossref, Google Scholar
40. Akiskal HS, Benazzi F: Family history validation of the bipolar nature of depressive mixed states. J Affect Disord 2003; 73:113–122Crossref, Google Scholar
41. Swann AC, Bowden CL, Morris D, Calabrese JR, Petty F, Small J, Dilsaver SC, Davis JM: Depression during mania. Treatment response to lithium or divalproex. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1997; 54:37–42Crossref, Google Scholar
42. Swann AC, Bowden CL, Calabrese JR, Dilsaver SC, Morris DD: Pattern of response to divalproex, lithium, or placebo in four naturalistic subtypes of mania. Neuropsychopharmacology 2002; 26:530–536Crossref, Google Scholar
43. Maj M, Pirozzi R, Magliano L, Fiorillo A, Bartoli L: Agitated “unipolar” major depression: prevalence, phenomenology, and outcome. J Clin Psychiatry 2006; 67:712–719Crossref, Google Scholar
44. Cassano GB, Mula M, Rucci P, Miniati M, Frank E, Kupfer DJ, Oppo A, Calugi S, Maggi L, Gibbons R, Fagiolini A: The structure of lifetime manic-hypomanic spectrum. J Affect Disord 2009; 112:59–70Crossref, Google Scholar
45. Benazzi F, Akiskal HS: The dual factor structure of self-rated MDQ hypomania: energized-activity versus irritable-thought racing. J Affect Disord 2003; 73:59–64Crossref, Google Scholar
46. Benazzi F: Testing new diagnostic criteria for hypomania. Ann Clin Psychiatry 2007; 19:99–104Crossref, Google Scholar
47. Bauer MS, Crits-Christoph P, Ball WA, Dewees E, McAllister T, Alahi P, Cacciola J, Whybrow PC: Independent assessment of manic and depressive symptoms by self-rating. Scale characteristics and implications for the study of mania. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1991; 48:807–812Crossref, Google Scholar
48. Angst J, Gamma A, Benazzi F, Ajdacic V, Eich D, Rossler W: Toward a re-definition of subthreshold bipolarity: epidemiology and proposed criteria for bipolar-II, minor bipolar disorders and hypomania. J Affect Disord 2003; 73:133–146Crossref, Google Scholar
49. Akiskal HS, Hantouche EG, Bourgeois ML, Azorin JM, Sechter D, Allilaire JF, Chatenêt-Duchêne L, Lancrenon S: Toward a refined phenomenology of mania: combining clinician-assessment and self-report in the French EPIMAN study. J Affect Disord 2001; 67:89–96Crossref, Google Scholar
50. Frank E: Proposed revisions to the concept of mixed episodes in DSM-5: the path travelled, in
51. Yildiz A, Vieta E, Leucht S, Baldessarini RJ: Efficacy of antimanic treatments: meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011; 36:375–389Crossref, Google Scholar
52. Suppes T, Webb A, Paul B, Carmody T, Kraemer H, Rush AJ: Clinical outcome in a randomized 1-year trial of clozapine versus treatment as usual for patients with treatment-resistant illness and a history of mania. Am J Psychiatry 1999; 156:1164–1169Google Scholar
53. Scherk H, Pajonk FG, Leucht S: Second-generation antipsychotic agents in the treatment of acute mania: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2007; 64:442–455Crossref, Google Scholar
54. Suppes T, Hirschfeld RM, Vieta E, Raines S, Paulsson B: Quetiapine for the treatment of bipolar II depression: analysis of data from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies. World J Biol Psychiatry 2008; 9:198–211Crossref, Google Scholar
55. De Fruyt J, Deschepper E, Audenaert K, Constant E, Floris M, Pitchot W, Sienaert P, Souery D, Claes S: Second generation antipsychotics in the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Psychopharmacol (in press)Google Scholar
56. Henry C, Etain B, Mathieu F, Raust A, Vibert JF, Scott J, Leboyer M: A French network of bipolar expert centres: a model to close the gap between evidence-based medicine and routine practice. J Affect Disord 2011; 131:358–363Crossref, Google Scholar
57. Fountoulakis KN, Vieta E, Siamouli M, Valenti M, Magiria S, Oral T, Fresno D, Giannakopoulos P, Kaprinis GS: Treatment of bipolar disorder: a complex treatment for a multi-faceted disorder. Ann Gen Psychiatry 2007; 6:27Crossref, Google Scholar
58. Simon NM, Otto MW, Wisniewski SR, Fossey M, Sagduyu K, Frank E, Sachs GS, Nierenberg AA, Thase ME, Pollack MH: Anxiety disorder comorbidity in bipolar disorder patients: data from the first 500 participants in the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). Am J Psychiatry 2004; 161:2222–2229Crossref, Google Scholar
59. Sachs GS, Nierenberg AA, Calabrese JR, Marangell LB, Wisniewski SR, Gyulai L, Friedman ES, Bowden CL, Fossey MD, Ostacher MJ, Ketter TA, Patel J, Hauser P, Rapport D, Martinez JM, Allen MH, Miklowitz DJ, Otto MW, Dennehy EB, Thase ME: Effectiveness of adjunctive antidepressant treatment for bipolar depression. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1711–1722Crossref, Google Scholar
60. Perlis RH, Ostacher MJ, Patel JK, Marangell LB, Zhang H, Wisniewski SR, Ketter TA, Miklowitz DJ, Otto MW, Gyulai L, Reilly-Harrington NA, Nierenberg AA, Sachs GS, Thase ME: Predictors of recurrence in bipolar disorder: primary outcomes from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). Am J Psychiatry 2006; 163:217–224Crossref, Google Scholar
61. Ostacher MJ, Perlis RH, Nierenberg AA, Calabrese J, Stange JP, Salloum I, Weiss RD, Sachs GS: Impact of substance use disorders on recovery from episodes of depression in bipolar disorder patients: prospective data from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). Am J Psychiatry 2010; 167:289–297Crossref, Google Scholar
62. Suppes T, Leverich GS, Keck PE, Nolen WA, Denicoff KD, Altshuler LL, McElroy SL, Rush AJ, Kupka R, Frye MA, Bickel M, Post RM: The Stanley Foundation Bipolar Treatment Outcome Network. II. Demographics and illness characteristics of the first 261 patients. J Affect Disord 2001; 67:45–59Crossref, Google Scholar
63. Leverich GS, Nolen WA, Rush AJ, McElroy SL, Keck PE, Denicoff KD, Suppes T, Altshuler LL, Kupka R, Kramlinger KG, Post RM: The Stanley Foundation Bipolar Treatment Outcome Network. I. Longitudinal methodology. J Affect Disord 2001; 67:33–44Crossref, Google Scholar
64. McElroy SL, Altshuler LL, Suppes T, Keck PE Jr, Frye MA, Denicoff KD, Nolen WA, Kupka RW, Leverich GS, Rochussen JR, Rush AJ, Post RM: Axis I psychiatric comorbidity and its relationship to historical illness variables in 288 patients with bipolar disorder. Am J Psychiatry 2001; 158:420–426Crossref, Google Scholar
65. Leverich GS, McElroy SL, Suppes T, Keck PE Jr, Denicoff KD, Nolen WA, Altshuler LL, Rush AJ, Kupka R, Frye MA, Autio KA, Post RM: Early physical and sexual abuse associated with an adverse course of bipolar illness. Biol Psychiatry 2002; 51:288–297Crossref, Google Scholar
66. Frye MA, Helleman G, McElroy SL, Altshuler LL, Black DO, Keck PE Jr, Nolen WA, Kupka R, Leverich GS, Grunze H, Mintz J, Post RM, Suppes T: Correlates of treatment-emergent mania associated with antidepressant treatment in bipolar depression. Am J Psychiatry 2009; 166:164–172Crossref, Google Scholar
67. Altshuler LL, Post RM, Black DO, Keck PE Jr, Nolen WA, Frye MA, Suppes T, Grunze H, Kupka RW, Leverich GS, McElroy SL, Walden J, Mintz J: Subsyndromal depressive symptoms are associated with functional impairment in patients with bipolar disorder: results of a large, multisite study. J Clinical Psychiatry 2006; 67:1551–1560Crossref, Google Scholar
68. Suppes T: Is there a role for antidepressants in the treatment of bipolar II depression? Am J Psychiatry 2010; 167:738–740Crossref, Google Scholar
69. Amsterdam JD, Shults J: Efficacy and safety of long-term fluoxetine versus lithium monotherapy of bipolar II disorder: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-substitution study. Am J Psychiatry 2010; 167:792–800Crossref, Google Scholar
70. Amsterdam JD, Wang CH, Shwarz M, Shults J: Venlafaxine versus lithium monotherapy of rapid and non-rapid cycling patients with bipolar II major depressive episode: a randomized, parallel group, open-label trial. J Affect Disord 2009; 112:219–230Crossref, Google Scholar
71. Young AH, McElroy SL, Bauer M, Philips N, Chang W, Olausson B, Paulsson B, Brecher M, EMBOLDEN I (Trial 001) Investigators: A double-blind, placebo-controlled study of quetiapine and lithium monotherapy in adults in the acute phase of bipolar depression (EMBOLDEN I). J Clin Psychiatry 2010; 71:150–162Crossref, Google Scholar
72. Scott J: Bipolar disorder: from early identification to personalized treatment. Early Intervent Psychiatry 2011; 5:89–90Crossref, Google Scholar
73. Leboyer M, Kupfer DJ: Bipolar disorder: new perspectives in health care and prevention. J Clin Psychiatry 2010; 71:1689–1695Crossref, Google Scholar
74. Madjid M, Willerson JT: Inflammatory markers in coronary heart disease. Br Med Bull (in press)Google Scholar
75. Kornum BR, Kawashima M, Faraco J, Lin L, Rico TJ, Hesselson S, Axtell RC, Kuipers H, Weiner K, Hamacher A, Kassack MU, Han F, Knudsen S, Li J, Dong X, Winkelmann J, Plazzi G, Nevsimalova S, Hong SC, Honda Y, Honda M, Högl B, Ton TG, Montplaisir J, Bourgin P, Kemlink D, Huang YS, Warby S, Einen M, Eshragh JL, Miyagawa T, Desautels A, Ruppert E, Hesla PE, Poli F, Pizza F, Frauscher B, Jeong JH, Lee SP, Strohl KP, Longstreth WT Jr, Kvale M, Dobrovolna M, Ohayon MM, Nepom GT, Wichmann HE, Rouleau GA, Gieger C, Levinson DF, Gejman PV, Meitinger T, Peppard P, Young T, Jennum P, Steinman L, Tokunaga K, Kwok PY, Risch N, Hallmayer J, Mignot E: Common variants in P2RY11 are associated with narcolepsy. Nat Genet 2011; 43:66–71Crossref, Google Scholar
76. Hallmayer J, Faraco J, Lin L, Hesselson S, Winkelmann J, Kawashima M, Mayer G, Plazzi G, Nevsimalova S, Bourgin P, Hong SC, Hong SS, Honda Y, Honda M, Högl B, Longstreth WT Jr, Montplaisir J, Kemlink D, Einen M, Chen J, Musone SL, Akana M, Miyagawa T, Duan J, Desautels A, Erhardt C, Hesla PE, Poli F, Frauscher B, Jeong JH, Lee SP, Ton TG, Kvale M, Kolesar L, Dobrovolná M, Nepom GT, Salomon D, Wichmann HE, Rouleau GA, Gieger C, Levinson DF, Gejman PV, Meitinger T, Young T, Peppard P, Tokunaga K, Kwok PY, Risch N, Mignot E: Narcolepsy is strongly associated with the T-cell receptor alpha locus. Nature genetics 2009; 41:708–711Crossref, Google Scholar
77. Padmos RC, Van Baal GC, Vonk R, Wijkhuijs AJ, Kahn RS, Nolen WA, Drexhage HA: Genetic and environmental influences on pro-inflammatory monocytes in bipolar disorder: a twin study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2009; 66:957–965Crossref, Google Scholar
78. Padmos RC, Hillegers MH, Knijff EM, Vonk R, Bouvy A, Staal FJ, de Ridder D, Kupka RW, Nolen WA, Drexhage HA: A discriminating messenger RNA signature for bipolar disorder formed by an aberrant expression of inflammatory genes in monocytes. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2008; 65:395–407Crossref, Google Scholar
79. Young LT: Is bipolar disorder a mitochondrial disease? J Psychiatry Neurosci 2007; 32:160–161Google Scholar
80. Berk M, Kapczinski F, Andreazza AC, Dean OM, Giorlando F, Maes M, Yücel M, Gama CS, Dodd S, Dean B, Magalhães PV, Amminger P, McGorry P, Malhi GS: Pathways underlying neuroprogression in bipolar disorder: focus on inflammation, oxidative stress and neurotrophic factors. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2011; 35:804–817Crossref, Google Scholar
81. Andreazza AC, Shao L, Wang JF, Young LT: Mitochondrial complex I activity and oxidative damage to mitochondrial proteins in the prefrontal cortex of patients with bipolar disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry 2010; 67:360–368Crossref, Google Scholar
