Pharmacological interventions for acute bipolar mania: a systematic review of randomized placebo-controlled trials.

Medical Research Matters, Eynsham, UK.
Bipolar Disorders (Impact Factor: 4.89). 09/2007; 9(6):551-60. DOI: 10.1111/j.1399-5618.2007.00468.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, placebo-controlled trials in acute bipolar mania to summarize available data on drug treatment of mania.
We included trials of medications licensed in the USA or UK for the treatment of any phase of bipolar disorder. Outcomes investigated were changes in mania scores, attrition, extrapyramidal effects and weight change. Data were combined through meta-analyses.
We included 13 studies (involving 3,089 subjects) and identified 2 studies for each of the following medications: carbamazepine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, quetiapine, risperidone, valproate semisodium and aripiprazole. All drugs showed significant benefit compared with placebo for reduction in mania scores. Compared with placebo, for all antipsychotics pooled, response to treatment (> or =50% reduction in Young Mania Rating Scale scores) was increased more than 1.7 times [relative risk (RR) = 1.74, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.54, 1.96]; for all mood stabilizers pooled, response to treatment was doubled (RR 2.01, 95% CI = 1.66, 2.43). Overall withdrawals were 34% fewer (24-43%) with antipsychotics, and 26% fewer (10-39%) with mood stabilizers. However, for carbamazepine, aripiprazole and lithium an increase in risk of withdrawal could not be excluded. Small but significant increases in extrapyramidal side effects occurred with risperidone and aripiprazole.
Antipsychotics and mood stabilizers are significantly more effective than placebo for the treatment of acute mania. Their effect sizes are similar. Small differences between effect sizes may be due to differences in the patients included in the studies or to chance. Carbamazepine and lithium may be more poorly tolerated, and antipsychotics cause more extrapyramidal side effects.

Download full-text


Available from: Victoria R Cornelius, Jul 06, 2015
1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Mania has long been recognized as aberrant behaviour indicative of mental illness. Manic states include a variety of complex and multifaceted symptoms that challenge clear clinical distinctions. Symptoms include over-activity, hypersexuality, irritability and reduced need for sleep, with cognitive deficits recently linked to functional outcome. Current treatments have arisen through serendipity or from other disorders. Hence, treatments are not efficacious for all patients, and there is an urgent need to develop targeted therapeutics. Part of the drug discovery process is the assessment of therapeutics in animal models. Here we review pharmacological, environmental and genetic manipulations developed to test the efficacy of therapeutics in animal models of mania. The merits of these models are discussed in terms of the manipulation used and the facet of mania measured. Moreover, the predictive validity of these models is discussed in the context of differentiating drugs that succeed or fail to meet criteria as approved mania treatments. The multifaceted symptomatology of mania has not been reflected in the majority of animal models, where locomotor activity remains the primary measure. This approach has resulted in numerous false positives for putative treatments. Recent work highlights the need to utilize multivariate strategies to enable comprehensive assessment of affective and cognitive dysfunction. Advances in therapeutic treatment may depend on novel models developed with an integrated approach that includes: (i) a comprehensive battery of tests for different aspects of mania, (ii) utilization of genetic information to establish aetiological validity and (iii) objective quantification of patient behaviour with translational cross-species paradigms.
    British Journal of Pharmacology 03/2011; 164(4):1263-84. DOI:10.1111/j.1476-5381.2011.01318.x · 4.99 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Management of bipolar disorder has undergone many revisions in recent years as new agents and treatments have been developed and studied with variable success. In conjunction with the advent of novel therapies and indications, there has been an increase in the understanding of the phenomenology and neurobiology of bipolar disorder that has made the classification and management of the illness necessarily more sophisticated. However, there remains a significant delay of 8 years in detecting and diagnosing bipolar disorder, and a further need to improve treatments. However, this paper has emphasized the need to be aware of recent advances and the emerging uses of new pharmacological treatments in the management of bipolar disorder. It has also highlighted the need for tailoring management to the individual. In particular, the successful treatment of bipolar disorder requires achieving prophylaxis and preventing relapse. In this regard, maintenance therapy is of paramount importance, and thus the tolerability of agents needs to be considered throughout treatment and should be factored into all management decisions. At the centre is the individual with bipolar disorder and the need to maintain a healthy therapeutic relationship. However, it is important to note that the evidence synthesized in this paper serves only as a guide to the management of bipolar disorder and that, in clinical practice, all treatment recommendations require contextual interpretation, the consideration of local factors and the consultation of additional resources.
    L Encéphale 12/2010; 36 Suppl 6:S188-96. · 0.60 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We conducted meta-analyses of findings from randomized, placebo-controlled, short-term trials for acute mania in manic or mixed states of DSM (III-IV) bipolar I disorder in 56 drug-placebo comparisons of 17 agents from 38 studies involving 10,800 patients. Of drugs tested, 13 (76%) were more effective than placebo: aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperdone, quetiapine, risperidone, tamoxifen, valproate, and ziprasidone. Their pooled effect size for mania improvement (Hedges' g in 48 trials) was 0.42 (confidence interval (CI): 0.36-0.48); pooled responder risk ratio (46 trials) was 1.52 (CI: 1.42-1.62); responder rate difference (RD) was 17% (drug: 48%, placebo: 31%), yielding an estimated number-needed-to-treat of 6 (all p<0.0001). In several direct comparisons, responses to various antipsychotics were somewhat greater or more rapid than lithium, valproate, or carbamazepine; lithium did not differ from valproate, nor did second generation antipsychotics differ from haloperidol. Meta-regression associated higher study site counts, as well as subject number with greater placebo (not drug) response; and higher baseline mania score with greater drug (not placebo) response. Most effective agents had moderate effect-sizes (Hedges' g=0.26-0.46); limited data indicated large effect sizes (Hedges' g=0.51-2.32) for: carbamazepine, cariprazine, haloperidol, risperidone, and tamoxifen. The findings support the efficacy of most clinically used antimanic treatments, but encourage more head-to-head studies and development of agents with even greater efficacy.
    Neuropsychopharmacology: official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology 10/2010; 36(2):375-89. DOI:10.1038/npp.2010.192 · 7.83 Impact Factor