Article

The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Task Force report on the nomenclature of course and outcome in bipolar disorders

Department of Psychiatry, Division of Mood and Anxiety Disorders, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, 7703 Floyd Curl Drive, MC 7792, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA.
Bipolar Disorders (Impact Factor: 4.89). 09/2009; 11(5):453-73. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-5618.2009.00726.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Via an international panel of experts, this paper attempts to document, review, interpret, and propose operational definitions used to describe the course of bipolar disorders for worldwide use, and to disseminate consensus opinion, supported by the existing literature, in order to better predict course and treatment outcomes.
Under the auspices of the International Society for Bipolar Disorders, a task force was convened to examine, report, discuss, and integrate findings from the scientific literature related to observational and clinical trial studies in order to reach consensus and propose terminology describing course and outcome in bipolar disorders.
Consensus opinion was reached regarding the definition of nine terms (response, remission, recovery, relapse, recurrence, subsyndromal states, predominant polarity, switch, and functional outcome) commonly used to describe course and outcomes in bipolar disorders. Further studies are needed to validate the proposed definitions.
Determination and dissemination of a consensus nomenclature serve as the first step toward producing a validated and standardized system to define course and outcome in bipolar disorders in order to identify predictors of outcome and effects of treatment. The task force acknowledges that there is limited validity to the proposed terms, as for the most part they represent a consensus opinion. These definitions need to be validated in existing databases and in future studies, and the primary goals of the task force are to stimulate research on the validity of proposed concepts and further standardize the technical nomenclature.

Download full-text

Full-text

Available from: Charles L Bowden, Jul 05, 2015
0 Followers
 · 
235 Views
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Objective Inflammatory cytokines have been suggested to be the trait or state markers of bipolar disorder, but with inconsistent results. This may be related to small sample sizes and poor control of some important confounding factors. Methods Gender/age-matched outpatients with bipolar disorder and normal controls were enrolled. The clinical symptoms were rated using the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale and Young Mania Rating Scale. Inflammatory cytokines, including soluble interleukin-6 receptor (sIL-6R), soluble interleukin-2 receptor (sIL-2R), C-reactive protein (CRP), soluble tumor necrosis factor receptor type 1 (sTNF-R1), soluble P-selectin receptor (sP-selectin), and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 (MCP-1), were assessed by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Results In total, 130 patients with bipolar disorder and 130 normal subjects were enrolled. Among the patients with bipolar disorder, 77 (59.2%) had bipolar I disorder, 53 (40.8%) had bipolar II disorder; 75 (57.7%) were in a euthymic state, 14 (10.8%) were in a manic/hypomanic state, and 41 (31.5%) were in a depressive state. The 130 bipolar patients had significantly higher levels of all cytokines than the normal controls (all p<0.0001). Using multivariate regression analysis with controlling of age, gender, BMI, smoking, duration of illness, and medication grouping, the patients with bipolar II disorder had significantly lower levels of sTNF-R1 than the patients with bipolar I disorder (p=0.038); the patients in a depressive state had significantly lower levels of sTNF-R1 than the patients in manic/hypomanic and euthymic states (p=0.009). Conclusion The study supported the association of bipolar disorder with inflammatory dysregulation, and sTNF-R1 may be a potential biomarker for staging bipolar disorder.
    Journal of Affective Disorders 09/2014; 166:187–192. DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2014.05.009 · 3.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Some residual symptoms were found to be associated with impaired functioning in euthymic bipolar patients, but their impact and relevance are unclear in clinical practice. We re-examined the functional influence of a large set of residual symptoms in 525 euthymic bipolar outpatients using self- and clinician-rated questionnaires (OPTHYMUM study). Methods This was a multi-centre, cross-sectional, non-interventional study of adult bipolar outpatients. All patients were euthymic at the time of assessment (YMRS score <8 and BDRS ≤8). Patients with low functioning (GAF score <60) were compared with the rest of the sample. Patients filled in specific questionnaires concerning their perceptions of different residual and subsyndromal symptoms. Results Ninety-seven (97) psychiatrists included 525 patients. Of them, 35 patients had a GAF score <60. These “low functioning patients” were more frequently unemployed, had presented more manic episodes and psychotic symptoms, used more atypical antipsychotics or benzodiazepines and received less adjunctive psychotherapy. Concerning residual symptoms, they had more frequent emotional subsyndromal symptoms, disruption of circadian rhythms and sexual disorders. They perceived some cognitive deficits and suffered more social and family stigma. Limitations Our study used an arbitrary GAF cut-off score (60) to separate bipolar patients in two groups (low and satisfactory functioning). Conclusions Residual symptoms are associated with functional impairment and may represent specific treatment targets. A personalized approach through specific psychotherapeutic programs may lead to more efficient support by the clinician.
    Journal of Affective Disorders 04/2014; 159:94–102. DOI:10.1016/j.jad.2014.02.023 · 3.71 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Objectives. These guidelines are based on a first edition that was published in 2004, and have been edited and updated with the available scientific evidence up to October 2012. Their purpose is to supply a systematic overview of all scientific evidence pertaining to the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder in adults. Methods. Material used for these guidelines are based on a systematic literature search using various data bases. Their scientific rigor was categorised into six levels of evidence (A-F) and different grades of recommendation to ensure practicability were assigned. Results. Maintenance trial designs are complex and changed fundamentally over time; thus, it is not possible to give an overall recommendation for long-term treatment. Different scenarios have to be examined separately: Prevention of mania, depression, or an episode of any polarity, both in acute responders and in patients treated de novo. Treatment might differ in Bipolar II patients or Rapid cyclers, as well as in special subpopulations. We identified several medications preventive against new manic episodes, whereas the current state of research into the prevention of new depressive episodes is less satisfactory. Lithium continues to be the substance with the broadest base of evidence across treatment scenarios. Conclusions. Although major advances have been made since the first edition of this guideline in 2004, there are still areas of uncertainty, especially the prevention of depressive episodes and optimal long-term treatment of Bipolar II patients.
    The World Journal of Biological Psychiatry 04/2013; 14(3):154-219. DOI:10.3109/15622975.2013.770551 · 4.23 Impact Factor