Article

Toward constructing an endophenotype strategy for bipolar disorders

Mood and Anxiety Disorders Program, National Institute of Mental Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Biological Psychiatry (Impact Factor: 9.47). 08/2006; 60(2):93-105. DOI: 10.1016/j.biopsych.2005.11.006
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Research aimed at elucidating the underlying neurobiology and genetics of bipolar disorder, and factors associated with treatment response, have been limited by a heterogeneous clinical phenotype and lack of knowledge about its underlying diathesis. We used a survey of clinical, epidemiological, neurobiological, and genetic studies to select and evaluate candidate endophenotypes for bipolar disorder. Numerous findings regarding brain function, brain structure, and response to pharmacological challenge in bipolar patients and their relatives deserve further investigation. Candidate brain function endophenotypes include attention deficits, deficits in verbal learning and memory, cognitive deficits after tryptophan depletion, circadian rhythm instability, and dysmodulation of motivation and reward. We selected reduced anterior cingulate volume and early-onset white matter abnormalities as candidate brain structure endophenotypes. Symptom provocation endophenotypes might be based on bipolar patients' sensitivity to sleep deprivation, psychostimulants, and cholinergic drugs. Phenotypic heterogeneity is a major impediment to the elucidation of the neurobiology and genetics of bipolar disorder. We present a strategy constructed to improve the phenotypic definition of bipolar disorder by elucidating candidate endophenotypes. Studies to evaluate candidate endophenotypes with respect to specificity, heritability, temporal stability, and prevalence in unaffected relatives are encouraged.

1 Follower
 · 
106 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Modern neuropsychopharmacology commenced in the 1950s with the serendipitous discovery of first-generation antipsychotics and antidepressants which were therapeutically effective yet had marked adverse effects. Today, a broader palette of safer and better-tolerated agents is available for helping people that suffer from schizophrenia, depression and other psychiatric disorders, while complementary approaches like psychotherapy also have important roles to play in their treatment, both alone and in association with medication. Nonetheless, despite considerable efforts, current management is still only partially effective, and highly-prevalent psychiatric disorders of the brain continue to represent a huge personal and socio-economic burden. The lack of success in discovering more effective pharmacotherapy has contributed, together with many other factors, to a relative disengagement by pharmaceutical firms from neuropsychiatry. Nonetheless, interest remains high, and partnerships are proliferating with academic centres which are increasingly integrating drug discovery and translational research into their traditional activities. This is, then, a time of transition and an opportune moment to thoroughly survey the field. Accordingly, the present paper, first, chronicles the discovery and development of psychotropic agents, focusing in particular on their mechanisms of action and therapeutic utility, and how problems faced were eventually overcome. Second, it discusses the lessons learned from past successes and failures, and how they are being applied to promote future progress. Third, it comprehensively surveys emerging strategies that are (1), improving our understanding of the diagnosis and classification of psychiatric disorders; (2), deepening knowledge of their underlying risk factors and pathophysiological substrates; (3), refining cellular and animal models for discovery and validation of novel therapeutic agents; (4), improving the design and outcome of clinical trials; (5), moving towards reliable biomarkers of patient subpopulations and medication efficacy and (6), promoting collaborative approaches to innovation by uniting key partners from the regulators, industry and academia to patients. Notwithstanding the challenges ahead, the many changes and ideas articulated herein provide new hope and something of a framework for progress towards the improved prevention and relief of psychiatric and other CNS disorders, an urgent mission for our Century. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier B.V. and ECNP. All rights reserved.
    European Neuropsychopharmacology 02/2015; DOI:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2015.01.016 · 5.40 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: White matter (WM) abnormalities are one of the most widely and consistently reported findings in schizophrenia (SZ) and bipolar disorder (BD). If these abnormalities are inherited determinants of illness, suitable to be classified as an endophenotype, relatives of patients must also have them at higher rate compared to the general population. In this review, we evaluate published diffusion tensor imaging (DTI) studies comparing first degree relatives of SZ and BD patients and healthy control subjects. We searched PubMed, Embase and PsychInfo for DTI studies which included an unaffected relative and a healthy comparison group. 22 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. WM abnormalities were found in many diverse regions in relatives of SZ patients. Although the findings were not completely consistent across studies, the most implicated areas were the frontal and temporal WM regions and the corpus callosum. Studies in relatives of BD patients were fewer in number with less consistent findings reported across studies. Our review supports the concept of WM abnormalities as an endophenotype in SZ, with somewhat weaker evidence in BD, but larger and higher quality studies are needed to make a definitive comment. Copyright © 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    Schizophrenia Research 12/2014; 161(2-3). DOI:10.1016/j.schres.2014.12.008 · 4.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In bipolar disorders, there are unclear diagnostic boundaries with unipolar depression and schizophrenia, inconsistency of treatment guidelines, relatively long trial-and-error phases of treatment optimization, and increasing use of complex combination therapies lacking empirical evidence. These suggest that the current definition of bipolar disorders based on clinical symptoms reflects a clinically and etiologically heterogeneous entity. Stratification of treatments for bipolar disorders based on biomarkers and improved clinical markers are greatly needed to increase the efficacy of currently available treatments and improve the chances of developing novel therapeutic approaches. This review provides a theoretical framework to identify biomarkers and summarizes the most promising markers for stratification regarding beneficial and adverse treatment effects. State and stage specifiers, neuropsychological tests, neuroimaging, and genetic and epigenetic biomarkers will be discussed with respect to their ability to predict the response to specific pharmacological and psychosocial psychotherapies for bipolar disorders. To date, the most reliable markers are derived from psychopathology and history-taking, while no biomarker has been found that reliably predicts individual treatment responses. This review underlines both the importance of clinical diagnostic skills and the need for biological research to identify markers that will allow the targeting of treatment specifically to sub-populations of bipolar patients who are more likely to benefit from a specific treatment and less likely to develop adverse reactions. Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier B.V.
    European neuropsychopharmacology: the journal of the European College of Neuropsychopharmacology 01/2015; 58(3). DOI:10.1016/j.euroneuro.2014.12.006 · 5.40 Impact Factor

Full-text

Download
223 Downloads
Available from
Jun 1, 2014