A F Carvalho1, C A Köhler1, B S Fernandes2, J Quevedo3, K W Miskowiak4, A R Brunoni5, R Machado-Vieira6, M Maes2, E Vieta7, M Berk2. 1. Department of Psychiatry and Translational Psychiatry Research Group,Faculty of Medicine,Federal University of Ceará,Fortaleza, CE,Brazil. 2. IMPACT Strategic Research Centre, Deakin University, School of Medicine and Barwon Health,Geelong - VIC,Australia. 3. Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences,Center for Experimental Models in Psychiatry, The University of Texas Medical School at Houston,Houston, TX,USA. 4. Psychiatric Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital,Rigshospitalet,Copenhagen,Denmark. 5. Interdisciplinary Center for Applied Neuromodulation (CINA), University Hospital, University of São Paulo,São Paulo,Brazil. 6. Laboratory of Neuroscience, LIM- 27,Institute and Department of Psychiatry, University of Sao Paulo,Sao Paulo,Brazil. 7. Bipolar Disorders Unit,Institute of Neuroscience, Hospital Clinic, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM,Barcelona,Catalonia,Spain.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To date no comprehensive evaluation has appraised the likelihood of bias or the strength of the evidence of peripheral biomarkers for bipolar disorder (BD). Here we performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses of peripheral non-genetic biomarkers for BD. METHOD: The Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo electronic databases were searched up to May 2015. Two independent authors conducted searches, examined references for eligibility, and extracted data. Meta-analyses in any language examining peripheral non-genetic biomarkers in participants with BD (across different mood states) compared to unaffected controls were included. RESULTS: Six references, which examined 13 biomarkers across 20 meta-analyses (5474 BD cases and 4823 healthy controls) met inclusion criteria. Evidence for excess of significance bias (i.e. bias favoring publication of 'positive' nominally significant results) was observed in 11 meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was high for (I 2 ⩾ 50%) 16 meta-analyses. Only two biomarkers met criteria for suggestive evidence namely the soluble IL-2 receptor and morning cortisol. The median power of included studies, using the effect size of the largest dataset as the plausible true effect size of each meta-analysis, was 15.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that there is an excess of statistically significant results in the literature of peripheral biomarkers for BD. Selective publication of 'positive' results and selective reporting of outcomes are possible mechanisms.
BACKGROUND: To date no comprehensive evaluation has appraised the likelihood of bias or the strength of the evidence of peripheral biomarkers for bipolar disorder (BD). Here we performed an umbrella review of meta-analyses of peripheral non-genetic biomarkers for BD. METHOD: The Pubmed/Medline, EMBASE and PsycInfo electronic databases were searched up to May 2015. Two independent authors conducted searches, examined references for eligibility, and extracted data. Meta-analyses in any language examining peripheral non-genetic biomarkers in participants with BD (across different mood states) compared to unaffected controls were included. RESULTS: Six references, which examined 13 biomarkers across 20 meta-analyses (5474 BD cases and 4823 healthy controls) met inclusion criteria. Evidence for excess of significance bias (i.e. bias favoring publication of 'positive' nominally significant results) was observed in 11 meta-analyses. Heterogeneity was high for (I 2 ⩾ 50%) 16 meta-analyses. Only two biomarkers met criteria for suggestive evidence namely the soluble IL-2 receptor and morning cortisol. The median power of included studies, using the effect size of the largest dataset as the plausible true effect size of each meta-analysis, was 15.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that there is an excess of statistically significant results in the literature of peripheral biomarkers for BD. Selective publication of 'positive' results and selective reporting of outcomes are possible mechanisms.
Authors: Cathy Davies; Andrea Cipriani; John P A Ioannidis; Joaquim Radua; Daniel Stahl; Umberto Provenzani; Philip McGuire; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2018-06 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Joaquim Radua; Valentina Ramella-Cravaro; John P A Ioannidis; Abraham Reichenberg; Nacharin Phiphopthatsanee; Taha Amir; Hyi Yenn Thoo; Dominic Oliver; Cathy Davies; Craig Morgan; Philip McGuire; Robin M Murray; Paolo Fusar-Poli Journal: World Psychiatry Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 49.548
Authors: Gabriel R Fries; Gabriela D Colpo; Nancy Monroy-Jaramillo; Junfei Zhao; Zhongming Zhao; Jodi G Arnold; Charles L Bowden; Consuelo Walss-Bass Journal: Eur Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 4.600
Authors: Matheus A Pasquali; Bernard L Harlow; Claudio N Soares; Michael W Otto; Lee S Cohen; Luciano Minuzzi; Daniel P Gelain; Jose Claudio F Moreira; Benicio N Frey Journal: Eur Arch Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2017-05-26 Impact factor: 5.270
Authors: Lícia P Pereira; Cristiano A Köhler; Brendon Stubbs; Kamilla W Miskowiak; Gerwyn Morris; Bárbara P de Freitas; Trevor Thompson; Brisa S Fernandes; André R Brunoni; Michael Maes; Diego A Pizzagalli; André F Carvalho Journal: Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry Date: 2018-05-17 Impact factor: 5.067
Authors: Theodore D Cosco; Toby Pillinger; Hadeer Emam; Marco Solmi; Sanjay Budhdeo; A Matthew Prina; Michael Maes; Dan J Stein; Brendon Stubbs; Andre F Carvalho Journal: Mol Neurobiol Date: 2018-10-31 Impact factor: 5.590
Authors: Brisa S Fernandes; Leanne M Williams; Johann Steiner; Marion Leboyer; André F Carvalho; Michael Berk Journal: BMC Med Date: 2017-04-13 Impact factor: 8.775
Authors: Lucas Borrione; Helena Bellini; Lais Boralli Razza; Ana G Avila; Chris Baeken; Anna-Katharine Brem; Geraldo Busatto; Andre F Carvalho; Adam Chekroud; Zafiris J Daskalakis; Zhi-De Deng; Jonathan Downar; Wagner Gattaz; Colleen Loo; Paulo A Lotufo; Maria da Graça M Martin; Shawn M McClintock; Jacinta O'Shea; Frank Padberg; Ives C Passos; Giovanni A Salum; Marie-Anne Vanderhasselt; Renerio Fraguas; Isabela Benseñor; Leandro Valiengo; Andre R Brunoni Journal: Braz J Psychiatry Date: 2020-03-16 Impact factor: 2.697