Dataset Information

Clinical significance of treatment effects with aripiprazole versus placebo in a study of manic or mixed episodes associated with pediatric bipolar I disorder.

ABSTRACT: Published studies in adult and pediatric bipolar disorder have used different definitions of treatment response. This analysis aimed to compare different definitions of response in a large sample of children and adolescents.Anexploratory analysis of a 4-week, multicenter, placebo-controlled study assessed patients (n=296; ages, 10-17 years) with an acute manic/mixed episode associated with BIPOLAR I disorder who were randomized to aripiprazole (10 or 30?mg/day) or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was mean change from baseline to week 4 in young mania rating scale (YMRS) total score. Additional assessments included: clinical global impressions-bipolar disorder (CGI-BP) Overall and mania scales, child global assessment scale (CGAS), and parent and subject general behavior inventory. Response was compared across seven operational definitions. Cohen's ? and Spearman's correlation tested relationships between various response definitions or changes in outcome measures and clinically meaningful improvement (defined as a CGI-BP overall improvement score of 1 or 2).Response rates varied depending upon the operational definition, but were highest for 95% reliable change (statistical method used to determine individual change from previous assessment) and ?33% reduction in YMRS total score. Response rate definitions with the highest validity in terms of predicting clinically meaningful improvement were: ?50% reduction on YMRS (?=0.64), a composite definition of response (YMRS <12.5, children's depression rating scale-revised (CDRS-R) ?40, and CGAS ?51; ?=0.59), and 95% reliable change on the CGAS or 33% reduction on YMRS (?=0.56). Parent ratings of symptoms were generally better at detecting symptom improvement than were subject ratings (?=?0.4-0.5 vs. ?0.2 when compared with CGI-BP overall improvement score).Clinically meaningful definitions of response in acute treatment of a manic/mixed episode in pediatric subjects include a 50% change in YMRS and a composite measure of response. Parent-reported measures of symptom improvement appear reliable for assessing symptom change.

SUBMITTER: Youngstrom E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3696952 | biostudies-literature | 2013 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical significance of treatment effects with aripiprazole versus placebo in a study of manic or mixed episodes associated with pediatric bipolar I disorder.

Youngstrom Eric E Zhao Joan J Mankoski Raymond R Forbes Robert A RA Marcus Ronald M RM Carson William W McQuade Robert R Findling Robert L RL

Journal of child and adolescent psychopharmacology 20130312 2

<h4>Objective</h4>Published studies in adult and pediatric bipolar disorder have used different definitions of treatment response. This analysis aimed to compare different definitions of response in a large sample of children and adolescents.<h4>Methods</h4>Anexploratory analysis of a 4-week, multicenter, placebo-controlled study assessed patients (n=296; ages, 10-17 years) with an acute manic/mixed episode associated with BIPOLAR I disorder who were randomized to aripiprazole (10 or 30 mg/day) ...[more]

PMID: 23480324

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundBipolar disorder is a mental illness in which manic and depressive states are repeated, causing psychosocial dysfunction. Manic/hypomanic episodes cause problems with interpersonal, social and financial activities, but there is limited evidence regarding the predictors of manic/hypomanic episodes in real-world clinical practice.MethodsThe multicenter treatment survey on bipolar disorder (MUSUBI) in Japanese psychiatric clinics was administered in an observational study that was conducted to accumulate evidence regarding bipolar disorder in real-world clinical practice. Psychiatrists were asked to complete a questionnaire about patients with bipolar disorder who visited 176 member clinics of the Japanese Association of Neuro-Psychiatric Clinics by conducting a retrospective medical record survey. Our study extracted baseline patient characteristics from September to October 2016, including comorbidities, mental status, duration of treatment, Global Assessment of Functioning (GAF) score, and pharmacological treatment details. We investigated the presence or absence of manic/hypomanic episodes over the course of one year from baseline to September-October 2017.ResultsIn total, 2231 participants were included in our study, 29.1% of whom had manic/hypomanic episodes over the course of one year from baseline. Binomial logistic regression analysis revealed that the presence of manic/hypomanic episodes was correlated with lower baseline GAF scores, rapid cycling, personality disorder, bipolar I disorder, and a mood state with manic or mixed features. Substance abuse was also a risk factor for manic episodes. There was no significant association between a baseline antidepressant prescription and manic/hypomanic episodes.ConclusionsIn Japan, 29.1% of outpatients with bipolar disorder had manic/hypomanic episodes over the course of one year. Our study suggested that a low GAF score, rapid cycling, personality disorder, bipolar I disorder, substance abuse, and baseline mood state could be predictors of manic/hypomanic episodes. Based on our findings, an antidepressant prescription is not a predictor of manic/hypomanic episodes.

Project description:BackgroundDepending on the classification system used, 5-40% of manic subjects present with concomitant depressive symptoms. This post-hoc analysis evaluates the hypothesis that (hypo)manic subjects have a higher burden of depression than non-(hypo)manic subjects.MethodsData from 806 Bipolar I or II participants of the Stanley Foundation Bipolar Network (SFBN) were analyzed, comprising 17,937 visits. A split data approach was used to separate evaluation and verification in independent samples. For verification of our hypotheses, we compared mean IDS-C scores ratings of non-manic, hypomanic and manic patients. Data were stored on an SQL-server and extracted using standard SQL functions. Linear correlation coefficients and pivotal tables were used to characterize patient groups.ResultsMean age of participants was 40 ± 12 years (range 18-81). 460 patients (57.1%) were female and 624 were diagnosed as having bipolar I disorder (77.4%) and 182 with bipolar II (22.6%). Data of 17,937 visits were available for analyses, split into odd and even patient numbers and stratified into three groups by YMRS-scores: not manic < 12, hypomanic < 21, manic < 30. Average IDS-C sum scores in manic or hypomanic states were significantly higher (p < .001) than for non-manic states. (Hypo)manic female patients were likely to show more depressive symptoms than males (p < .001). Similar results were obtained when only the core items of the YMRS or only the number of depressive symptoms were considered. Analyzing the frequency of (hypo)manic mixed states applying a proxy of the DSM-5 mixed features specifier extracted from the IDS-C, we found that almost 50% of the (hypo)manic group visits fulfilled DSM-5 mixed features specifier criteria.ConclusionSubjects with a higher manic symptom load are also significantly more likely to experience a higher number of depressive symptoms. Mania and depression are not opposing poles of bipolarity but complement each other.

Project description:BackgroundAsenapine demonstrated superiority over placebo for mania in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute current manic or mixed episodes in 2 randomized, placebo-and olanzapine-controlled trials. We report the results of exploratory pooled post hoc analyses from these trials evaluating asenapine's effects on depressive symptoms in patients from these trials with significant baseline depressive symptoms.MethodsIn the original trials (A7501004 [NCT00159744], A7501005 [NCT00159796]), 977 patients were randomized to flexible-dose sublingual asenapine (10 mg twice daily on day 1; 5 or 10 mg twice daily thereafter), placebo, or oral olanzapine 5-20 mg once daily for 3 weeks. Three populations were defined using baseline depressive symptoms: (1) Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score ≥20 (n = 132); (2) Clinical Global Impression for Bipolar Disorder-Depression (CGI-BP-D) scale severity score ≥4 (n = 170); (3) diagnosis of mixed episodes (n = 302) by investigative site screening. For each population, asenapine and olanzapine were independently compared with placebo using least squares mean change from baseline on depressive symptom measures.ResultsDecreases in MADRS total score were statistically greater with asenapine versus placebo at days 7 and 21 in all populations; differences between olanzapine and placebo were not significant. Decreases in CGI-BP-D score were significantly greater with asenapine versus placebo at day 7 in all categories and day 21 in population 1; CGI-BP-D score reductions were significantly greater with olanzapine versus placebo at day 21 in population 1 and day 7 in populations 2 and 3.ConclusionsThese post hoc analyses show that asenapine reduced depressive symptoms in bipolar I disorder patients experiencing acute manic or mixed episodes with clinically relevant depressive symptoms at baseline; olanzapine results appeared to be less consistent. Controlled studies of asenapine in patients with acute bipolar depression are necessary to confirm the generalizability of these findings.

Project description:Background:Patient characteristics and disease progression may affect response to pharmacologic intervention in bipolar I disorder. Asenapine is approved for acute treatment of manic/mixed episodes of bipolar I disorder in patients 10-17 years old. Post hoc analyses assessed asenapine efficacy in pediatric patients by current manic or mixed episode, number of lifetime episodes, and baseline body mass index (BMI). Patients and methods:Data were obtained from a 3-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial of asenapine 2.5, 5.0, or 10.0 mg twice daily (BID) in male or female patients (10-17 years) with bipolar I disorder (NCT01244815). Patients were stratified by current episode type (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, fourth edition - defined mixed/manic), number of lifetime episodes (<3, 3-5, >5), and baseline BMI tertile. Changes from baseline to day 21 in Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score and Clinical Global Impressions Scale for use in Bipolar Illness (CGI-BP) were assessed in asenapine subgroups vs placebo. Results:In patients with mixed episodes, differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were statistically significant for each asenapine dose vs placebo (P<0.001) at day 21; in patients with manic episodes, significant differences vs placebo were seen in all groups (P<0.05) except 2.5 mg BID on the YMRS. In patients with <3 previous mixed/manic episodes, significant differences in YMRS and CGI-BP scores were observed for all asenapine doses vs placebo (P<0.05). In patients with 3-5 or >5 previous episodes, asenapine 10 mg BID was significantly different than placebo (P<0.05) on both scales; differences vs placebo varied for lower doses. Baseline body weight or BMI did not appear to influence the efficacy of asenapine. Conclusion:Asenapine was effective in the treatment of pediatric patients with bipolar I disorder. Efficacy did not appear to be influenced by the type of current episode, stage of disease progression, or baseline body weight/BMI.

Project description:AimsRapid-cycling bipolar disorder is difficult to treat and associated with greater morbidity than non-rapid-cycling disease. This post hoc analysis evaluated 28 patients with rapid-cycling bipolar I disorder from a 100-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessing long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of aripiprazole in patients with bipolar I disorder (most recently manic/mixed).MethodsFollowing >or= 6 consecutive weeks' stabilisation with open-label aripiprazole, patients were randomised (1 : 1) to aripiprazole or placebo. Patients completing 26 weeks treatment without relapse could continue for a further 74 weeks. Primary end-point was time to relapse for manic, mixed or depressive symptoms, defined as discontinuation due to lack of efficacy. Safety assessments included adverse event (AE) monitoring and changes in weight and lipid, glucose and prolactin levels.ResultsOf the 28 patients (aripiprazole, n = 14; placebo, n = 14) with rapid-cycling bipolar disorder, 12 (aripiprazole, n = 7; placebo, n = 5) completed the initial 26-week treatment period and three (all aripiprazole treated) completed the 100-week, double-blind period. Time to relapse was significantly longer with aripiprazole vs. placebo at week 26 [log-rank p = 0.033; 26-week hazard ratio = 0.21 (95% CI: 0.04, 1.03)] and week 100 [log-rank p = 0.017; 100-week hazard ratio = 0.18 (95% CI: 0.04, 0.88)]. The most commonly reported AEs with aripiprazole during the 100 weeks (>or= 10% incidence and twice placebo) were anxiety (n = 4), sinusitis (n = 4), depression (n = 3) and upper respiratory infection (n = 3). One aripiprazole-treated patient discontinued due to an AE (akathisia). There were no significant between-group differences in mean changes in weight or metabolic parameters.ConclusionIn this small, post hoc subanalysis, aripiprazole maintained efficacy and was generally well tolerated in the long-term treatment of rapid-cycling bipolar disorder. Further research with prospectively designed and adequately powered trials is warranted.

Dataset Information

Clinical significance of treatment effects with aripiprazole versus placebo in a study of manic or mixed episodes associated with pediatric bipolar I disorder.

Publications

Clinical significance of treatment effects with aripiprazole versus placebo in a study of manic or mixed episodes associated with pediatric bipolar I disorder.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets