Article

Prevalence, chronicity, burden and borders of bipolar disorder.

University of Siena, Department of Molecular Medicine and Clinical (DAI) Department of Mental Health, Viale Bracci 1, Siena 53100, Italy. Electronic address: .
Journal of Affective Disorders (Impact Factor: 3.76). 03/2013; DOI: 10.1016/j.jad.2013.02.001
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Bipolar disorder (BD) has traditionally been thought of as an episodic condition, characterized by periods of hypomania/mania and depression. However, evidence is accumulating to suggest that this condition is associated with significant chronicity. For a large proportion of patients with BD, residual, sub-syndromal symptoms persist between major syndromal episodes, and studies have shown that many patients with bipolar disorder are symptomatic for approximately 50% of the time over follow-up periods of greater than 10 years. Moreover, while the prevalence of BD has been estimated to be around 1-2%, there is growing evidence that this may be a substantial underestimation. There are a number of reasons for this potential underestimation, including difficulties in diagnosis. Adding to the burden of BD is the issue of comorbidity, with an increased prevalence of many chronic conditions in those with a primary diagnosis of BD. Conversely, for many patients with chronic conditions, both medical and psychiatric, BD frequently exists as a comorbid secondary diagnosis. This issue of comorbidity complicates estimates of use of pharmaceutical agents for BD, such as mood stabilizers, which are known to be used off-label in conditions such as borderline personality or substance use disorder. We speculate that such off-label prescribing may not be truly off-label but may be instead fully justified by an overlooked secondary diagnosis of BD. Finally, we discuss the association of bipolar disorder with a significant economic burden, to the individual and to society, both due to the direct costs of medical expenditure and indirect costs such as loss of productivity and increased mortality.

0 Bookmarks
 · 
120 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bipolar disorder (BD) is one of the world's ten most disabling conditions. More options are urgently needed for treating bipolar depressive episodes and for safer, more tolerable long-term maintenance treatment. We reviewed 30 recent clinical trials in depressive episodes (eight tested compounds) and 14 clinical trials in maintenance treatment (ten tested compounds). Positive results in Phase III trials, regulatory approval and/or new therapeutic indications were obtained with some of the developing drugs, particularly for depressive episodes. The current BD pipeline is encouraging with promising new compounds, acting on novel pharmacological targets and on specific aspects of bipolar depression.
    Drug Discovery Today 07/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.drudis.2014.07.010 · 5.96 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bipolar disorders (BDs) and addictions constitute reciprocal risk factors and are best considered under a unitary perspective. The concepts of allostasis and allostatic load (AL) may contribute to the understanding of the complex relationships between BD and addictive behaviors. Allostasis entails the safeguarding of reward function stability by recruitment of changes in the reward and stress system neurocircuitry and it may help to elucidate neurobiological underpinnings of vulnerability to addiction in BD patients. Conceptualizing BD as an illness involving the cumulative build-up of allostatic states, we hypothesize a progressive dysregulation of reward circuits clinically expressed as negative affective states (i.e., anhedonia). Such negative affective states may render BD patients more vulnerable to drug addiction, fostering a very rapid transition from occasional drug use to addiction, through mechanisms of negative reinforcement. The resulting addictive behavior-related ALs, in turn, may contribute to illness progression. This framework could have a heuristic value to enhance research on pathophysiology and treatment of BD and addiction comorbidity.
    Frontiers in Psychiatry 12/2014; 5. DOI:10.3389/fpsyt.2014.00173
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background and Objectives Bipolar disorder (BD) may result in a greater burden than all forms of cancer, Alzheimer’s disease and epilepsy. Cost-of-illness (COI) studies provide useful information on the economic burden that BD imposes on a society. Furthermore, COI studies are pivotal sources of evidence used in economic evaluations. This study aims to give a general overview of COI studies for BD and to discuss methodological issues that might potentially influence results. This study also aims to provide recommendations to improve practice in this area, based on the review. Methods A search was performed to identify COI studies of BD. The following electronic databases were searched: MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, HMIC and openSIGLE. The primary outcome of this review was the annual cost per BD patient. A narrative assessment of key methodological issues was also included. Based on these findings, recommendations for good practice were drafted. Results Fifty-four studies were included in this review. Because of the widespread methodological heterogeneity among included studies, no attempt has been made to pool results of different studies. Potential areas for methodological improvement were identified. These were: description of the disease and population, the approach to deal with comorbidities, reporting the rationale and impact for choosing different cost perspectives, and ways in which uncertainty is addressed. Conclusions This review showed that numerous COI studies have been conducted for BD since 1995. However, these studies employed varying methods, which limit the comparability of findings. The recommendations provided by this review can be used by those conducting COI studies and those critiquing them, to increase the credibility and reporting of study results.
    PharmacoEconomics 01/2015; DOI:10.1007/s40273-014-0250-y · 3.34 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
17 Downloads
Available from
Oct 10, 2014