OBJECTIVES: Patients with bipolar disorder spend the most time in the depressed phase, and that phase is associated with the most morbidity and mortality. Treatment of bipolar depression lacks a test to determine who will respond to treatment. White matter disruptions have been found in bipolar disorder. Previous reports suggest that white matter disruptions may be associated with resistance to antidepressant medication, but this has never been investigated in a prospective study using a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medication. METHODS: Eighteen subjects with bipolar disorder who were in a major depressive episode and off all medications were recruited. Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired using a 64-direction diffusion tensor imaging sequence on a 3T scanner. Subjects were treated with 8 weeks of open-label lurasidone. The Montgomrey-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was completed weekly. Tract-Based Spatial Statistics were utilized to perform a regression analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) data with treatment outcome as assessed by percent change in MADRS as a regressor while controlling for age and sex, using a threshold of P (threshold-free cluster enhancement-corrected) <.05. RESULTS: FA was positively correlated with antidepressant treatment response in multiple regions of the mean FA skeleton bilaterally, including tracts in the frontal and parietal lobes. CONCLUSIONS: Greater disruptions in the white matter tracts in bipolar disorder were associated with poorer antidepressant response to lurasidone. The disruptions may potentially indicate treatment with a different antidepressant medication class. These results are limited by the open-label study design, sample size and lack of a healthy control group.
OBJECTIVES:Patients with bipolar disorder spend the most time in the depressed phase, and that phase is associated with the most morbidity and mortality. Treatment of bipolar depression lacks a test to determine who will respond to treatment. White matter disruptions have been found in bipolar disorder. Previous reports suggest that white matter disruptions may be associated with resistance to antidepressant medication, but this has never been investigated in a prospective study using a Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved medication. METHODS: Eighteen subjects with bipolar disorder who were in a major depressive episode and off all medications were recruited. Magnetic resonance imaging was acquired using a 64-direction diffusion tensor imaging sequence on a 3T scanner. Subjects were treated with 8 weeks of open-label lurasidone. The Montgomrey-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) was completed weekly. Tract-Based Spatial Statistics were utilized to perform a regression analysis of fractional anisotropy (FA) data with treatment outcome as assessed by percent change in MADRS as a regressor while controlling for age and sex, using a threshold of P (threshold-free cluster enhancement-corrected) <.05. RESULTS: FA was positively correlated with antidepressant treatment response in multiple regions of the mean FA skeleton bilaterally, including tracts in the frontal and parietal lobes. CONCLUSIONS: Greater disruptions in the white matter tracts in bipolar disorder were associated with poorer antidepressant response to lurasidone. The disruptions may potentially indicate treatment with a different antidepressant medication class. These results are limited by the open-label study design, sample size and lack of a healthy control group.
Authors: Stephen M Smith; Mark Jenkinson; Mark W Woolrich; Christian F Beckmann; Timothy E J Behrens; Heidi Johansen-Berg; Peter R Bannister; Marilena De Luca; Ivana Drobnjak; David E Flitney; Rami K Niazy; James Saunders; John Vickers; Yongyue Zhang; Nicola De Stefano; J Michael Brady; Paul M Matthews Journal: Neuroimage Date: 2004 Impact factor: 6.556
Authors: T Kieseppä; R Mäntylä; A Tuulio-Henriksson; K Luoma; O Mantere; M Ketokivi; M Holma; P Jylhä; T Melartin; K Suominen; M Vuorilehto; E Isometsä Journal: Eur Psychiatry Date: 2013-10-28 Impact factor: 5.361
Authors: P B Moore; D J Shepherd; D Eccleston; I C Macmillan; U Goswami; V L McAllister; I N Ferrier Journal: Br J Psychiatry Date: 2001-02 Impact factor: 9.319
Authors: W T Longstreth; T A Manolio; A Arnold; G L Burke; N Bryan; C A Jungreis; P L Enright; D O'Leary; L Fried Journal: Stroke Date: 1996-08 Impact factor: 7.914
Authors: M Mehmet Haznedar; Francesca Roversi; Stefano Pallanti; Nicolo Baldini-Rossi; David B Schnur; Elizabeth M Licalzi; Cheuk Tang; Patrick R Hof; Eric Hollander; Monte S Buchsbaum Journal: Biol Psychiatry Date: 2005-04-01 Impact factor: 13.382
Authors: Angelica de Baumont; Mariana Maschietto; Leandro Lima; Dirce Maria Carraro; Eloisa Helena Olivieri; Alex Fiorini; Luiz André Nardin Barreta; Joana Almeida Palha; Paulo Belmonte-de-Abreu; Carlos Alberto Moreira Filho; Helena Brentani Journal: Schizophr Res Date: 2014-12-06 Impact factor: 4.939
Authors: Maurizio Pompili; Marco Innamorati; J John Mann; Maria A Oquendo; David Lester; Antonio Del Casale; Gianluca Serafini; Silvia Rigucci; Andrea Romano; Antonino Tamburello; Giovanni Manfredi; Eleonora De Pisa; Stefan Ehrlich; Giancarlo Giupponi; Mario Amore; Roberto Tatarelli; Paolo Girardi Journal: Prog Neuropsychopharmacol Biol Psychiatry Date: 2008-05-20 Impact factor: 5.067
Authors: Martin J Lan; Francesca Zanderigo; Spiro P Pantazatos; M Elizabeth Sublette; Jeffrey Miller; R Todd Ogden; J John Mann Journal: Int J Neuropsychopharmacol Date: 2022-08-04 Impact factor: 5.678