D Popovic1, C Torrent, J M Goikolea, N Cruz, J Sánchez-Moreno, A González-Pinto, E Vieta. 1. Bipolar Disorders Program, Department of Psychiatry, Clinical Institute of Neuroscience, Hospital Clínic, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain; Department of Psychiatry, Neurobiology, Pharmacology and Biotechnology, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Predominant polarity (PP) is an important variable in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This study aimed at determining the role of polarity index (PI), a metric indicating antimanic versus antidepressive prophylactic potential of drugs, in clinical decision-making. METHOD: Two hundred and fifty-seven of 604 (43%) of patients with BD-I or II fulfilled criteria for manic (MPP) or depressive PP (DPP). The PI, representing the ratio of number needed to treat (NNT) for depression prevention to NNT for mania prevention, was calculated for patients' current treatment. MPP and DPP groups were compared regarding sociodemographic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-three patients (55.6%) fulfilled criteria for DPP and 114 (44.4%) for MPP. Total PI, Antipsychotics' PI, and mood stabilizers PI were higher, indicating a stronger antimanic action, in MPP. MPP presented higher prevalence of BD-I, male gender, younger age, age at onset and at first hospitalization, more hospitalizations, primary substance misuse, and psychotic symptoms. DP correlated with BD-II, depressive onset, primary life events, melancholia, and suicide attempts. CONCLUSION: The results confirm the usefulness of the PI. In this large sample, clinical differences among these groups justify differential treatment approach. The PI appears to be a useful operationalization of what clinicians do for maintenance therapy in BD.
OBJECTIVE: Predominant polarity (PP) is an important variable in maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder (BD). This study aimed at determining the role of polarity index (PI), a metric indicating antimanic versus antidepressive prophylactic potential of drugs, in clinical decision-making. METHOD: Two hundred and fifty-seven of 604 (43%) of patients with BD-I or II fulfilled criteria for manic (MPP) or depressive PP (DPP). The PI, representing the ratio of number needed to treat (NNT) for depression prevention to NNT for mania prevention, was calculated for patients' current treatment. MPP and DPP groups were compared regarding sociodemographic, clinical and therapeutic characteristics. RESULTS: One hundred and forty-three patients (55.6%) fulfilled criteria for DPP and 114 (44.4%) for MPP. Total PI, Antipsychotics' PI, and mood stabilizers PI were higher, indicating a stronger antimanic action, in MPP. MPP presented higher prevalence of BD-I, male gender, younger age, age at onset and at first hospitalization, more hospitalizations, primary substance misuse, and psychotic symptoms. DP correlated with BD-II, depressive onset, primary life events, melancholia, and suicide attempts. CONCLUSION: The results confirm the usefulness of the PI. In this large sample, clinical differences among these groups justify differential treatment approach. The PI appears to be a useful operationalization of what clinicians do for maintenance therapy in BD.
Authors: Andrea Murru; Dina Popovic; Isabella Pacchiarotti; Diego Hidalgo; Jordi León-Caballero; Eduard Vieta Journal: Curr Psychiatry Rep Date: 2015-08 Impact factor: 5.285
Authors: Ayal Schaffer; Erkki T Isometsä; Jean-Michel Azorin; Frederick Cassidy; Tina Goldstein; Zoltán Rihmer; Mark Sinyor; Leonardo Tondo; Doris H Moreno; Gustavo Turecki; Catherine Reis; Lars Vedel Kessing; Kyooseob Ha; Abraham Weizman; Annette Beautrais; Yuan-Hwa Chou; Nancy Diazgranados; Anthony J Levitt; Carlos A Zarate; Lakshmi Yatham Journal: Aust N Z J Psychiatry Date: 2015-07-14 Impact factor: 5.744
Authors: Roger S McIntyre; Martin Alda; Ross J Baldessarini; Michael Bauer; Michael Berk; Christoph U Correll; Andrea Fagiolini; Kostas Fountoulakis; Mark A Frye; Heinz Grunze; Lars V Kessing; David J Miklowitz; Gordon Parker; Robert M Post; Alan C Swann; Trisha Suppes; Eduard Vieta; Allan Young; Mario Maj Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2022-10 Impact factor: 79.683
Authors: Julia Volkert; Kathrin C Zierhut; Miriam A Schiele; Martina Wenzel; Juliane Kopf; Sarah Kittel-Schneider; Andreas Reif Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2014-11-22 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Andre F Carvalho; João Quevedo; Roger S McIntyre; Márcio G Soeiro-de-Souza; Konstantinos N Fountoulakis; Michael Berk; Thomas N Hyphantis; Eduard Vieta Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2014-10-31 Impact factor: 5.176
Authors: G M Goodwin; P M Haddad; I N Ferrier; J K Aronson; Trh Barnes; A Cipriani; D R Coghill; S Fazel; J R Geddes; H Grunze; E A Holmes; O Howes; S Hudson; N Hunt; I Jones; I C Macmillan; H McAllister-Williams; D R Miklowitz; R Morriss; M Munafò; C Paton; B J Saharkian; Kea Saunders; Jma Sinclair; D Taylor; E Vieta; A H Young Journal: J Psychopharmacol Date: 2016-03-15 Impact factor: 4.153
Authors: Masoud Kamali; Samantha Pegg; Jessica A Janos; William V Bobo; Benjamin Brody; Keming Gao; Terence A Ketter; Susan L McElroy; Melvin G McInnis; Dustin J Rabideau; Noreen A Reilly-Harrington; Richard C Shelton; Louisa G Sylvia; Mauricio Tohen; Andrew Nierenberg Journal: J Psychiatr Res Date: 2021-06-02 Impact factor: 5.250