Atypical depression: a variant of bipolar II or a bridge between unipolar and bipolar II?

BACKGROUND: Although increasing data link atypical depression (AD) to the bipolar spectrum, controversies abound about the extent of the overlap. In particular, the Columbia group, which has pioneered in providing data on operational clarity and pharmacological specificity of atypical depressions, has nonetheless consistently avoided studying its discriminatory validity from bipolar II (BP-II). Accordingly, we undertook a full scale validation of such a link in a large clinical sample of BP-II and unipolar (UP) major depressive disorder (MDD). METHODS: Consecutive 348 BP-II and 254 MDD outpatients presenting with major depressive episodes (MDE) were interviewed off psychoactive drugs with a modified Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV, the structured Family History Screen and the Hypomania Interview Guide. We used the DSM-IV criteria for "atypical features" specifier. Depressive mixed state was defined as > or =3 concurrent hypomanic signs and symptoms during MDE. Bipolar validators were age at onset, high depressive recurrence, depressive mixed state and bipolar family history (types I and II). Univariate and multivariate logistic regression were used to examine associations and control for confounding variables. RESULTS: Frequency of AD was 43.0% in the combined BP-II and MDD sample. AD, versus non-AD, had significantly higher rates of BP-II. AD was significantly associated with all bipolar validators, among which family history was the most robust. A dose-response relationship was found between number of atypical symptoms during MDE and bipolar family history loading. The association between bipolar family history and number of atypical symptoms remained significant after controlling for the confounding effect of BP-II. Bipolar family history was strongly associated with the atypical symptoms of leaden paralysis and hypersomnia. CONCLUSION: These results confirm a strong link between AD and bipolar validators along psychopathologic and familial grounds. From a practical standpoint, AD is best viewed as a variant of BP-II. Clinicians confronted with MDE patients presenting with atypical features should strongly consider a BP-II diagnosis. In a more hypothetical vein, atypicality-or some associated features thereof-might serve as a nosologic bridge between UP and BP-II.     

Delineating bipolar II mixed states in the Ravenna-San Diego collaborative study: the relative prevalence and diagnostic significance of hypomanic features during major depressive episodes

BACKGROUND: Depressive mixed state (DMX), defined by hypomanic features during a major depressive episode (MDE) is under-researched. Accordingly, study aims were to find DMX prevalence in unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar II depressive phase, to delineate the most common hypomanic signs and symptoms during DMX, and to assess their sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of DMX and bipolar II. METHODS: 161 unipolar and bipolar II MDE psychotropic drug- and substance-free consecutive outpatients were interviewed during an MDE with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. DMX was defined at two threshold levels as an MDE with two or more (DMX2), and with three or more (DMX3) simultaneous intra-episode hypomanic signs and symptoms. RESULTS: DMX2 was present in 73.1% of bipolar II, and in 42.1% of unipolar MDD (P<0.000); DMX3 was present in 46.3% of bipolar II, and in 7.8% of unipolar MDD (P<0.000). The most common hypomanic manifestations during MDE were irritability, distractibility, and racing thoughts. Irritability had the best combination of sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of DMX2 and DMX3. Various combinations of irritability, distractibility, and racing thoughts correctly classified the highest number of DMX2 and DMX3, and had the strongest predictive power. DMX2 had high sensitivity and low specificity for bipolar II, whereas DMX3 had low sensitivity (46.3%) and high specificity (92.1%). LIMITATIONS: Single interviewer, cross-sectional assessment, and interviewing clinician not blind to patients' unipolar vs. bipolar status. CONCLUSIONS: When conservatively defined (>or = 3 intra-episode hypomanic signs and symptoms during MDE), DMX is prevalent in the natural history of bipolar II but uncommon in unipolar MDD. These findings have treatment implications, because of growing concerns that antidepressants may worsen DMX, which in turn may respond better to mood stabilizers. These data also have methodological implications for diagnostic practice: rather than solely depending on the vagaries of the patient's memory for past hypomanic episodes, the search for hypomanic features--ostensibly elation would not be one of those--during an index depressive episode could enhance the detection of bipolar II in otherwise pseudo-unipolar patients. Strict adherence to current clinical diagnostic interview instruments (e.g. the SCID) would make such detection difficult, if not impossible.     

Agitated "unipolar" depression re-conceptualized as a depressive mixed state: implications for the antidepressant-suicide controversy

BACKGROUND: The nosologic status of agitated depression is unresolved. Are they unipolar (UP) or bipolar (BP)? Are they mixed states? Even more controversial is the notion that antidepressants might play some role in the suicidality of such patients (Akiskal and Mallya, 1987) [Akiskal, H.S., Mallya, G., 1987. Criteria for the "soft" bipolar spectrum: treatment implications. Psychopharmacol Bull. 23, 68-73]. METHODS: After excluding all patients with history of hypomanic episodes occurring outside the frame of a major depressive episode (MDE), even those with a shorter duration of hypomanic symptoms than stipulated in DSM-IV, the remaining consecutive 254 unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) private adult (> 21 years old) outpatients were interviewed (off psychoactive drugs for 2 weeks) with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-CV), the Hypomania Interview Guide (HIGH-C), and the Family History Screen. Intra-MDE hypomanic symptoms were systematically assessed, with > or = 3 such symptoms required for a diagnosis of depressive mixed state (DMX). Agitated depression was defined as an MDE with HIGH-C psychomotor agitation score > or = 2. Logistic regression was used to study associations and control for confounding variables. RESULTS: In this strictly defined unipolar sample, agitated depression was present in 19.7%. Compared with its non-agitated counterpart, it had significantly fewer recurrences, less chronicity, higher rate of family history for bipolar disorder, and DMX; and, among the intra-depressive non-euphoric hypomanic symptoms (in decreasing order of frequency), distractibility, racing/crowded thoughts, irritable mood, talkativeness, and risky behavior. The most striking finding was the robust association between agitated depression and DMX (OR = 36.9). Furthermore, patients with psychomotor agitation had significantly higher rate of weight loss and suicidal ideation. Of DMX symptoms, we found an association between suicidal ideation, psychomotor activation, and racing thoughts. Agitated depression was tested by forward stepwise logistic regression versus all variables significantly different in the pairwise comparisons, yielding DMX, talkativeness, and suicidal ideation as the independent significant positive predictors. LIMITATIONS: No suicidal ideation scale was used. CONCLUSIONS: Agitated depression emerges as a distinct affective syndrome with weight loss, pressure of speech, racing thoughts and suicidal ideation. Psychomotor activation and racing thoughts during MDD independently predicted suicidal ideation. In this "unipolar" MDD sample, agitated depression had a strong clustering of intra-episode non-euphoric hypomanic symptoms (i.e. DMX) which, coupled with its association with bipolar family history, support its link with the bipolar spectrum. Agitated depression is therefore best regarded as "pseudo-unipolar." These findings overall accord with classical German concepts of agitated depression as a mixed state. Given that these patients are typically activated along the lines of risk-taking behavior, Kraepelin's rubric of "excited (mixed) depression" appears to us the preferred terminology over "agitated depression". CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The data reported herein, placed in the setting of the literature reviewed in the discussion suggest that the reports of increased risk of suicidal ideation and/or behavior in some depressed patients treated by antidepressant monotherapy or combinations thereof might be attributed to baseline psychomotor activation/agitation as part of an unrecognized bipolar mixed state. Whether antidepressants induce de novo suicidality in MDD cannot be answered without adequately powered prospective double-blind studies, unlikely to be conducted because of ethical constraints. Nonetheless, we submit that agitated, activated, or otherwise excited depressions (which we consider as depressive mixed states) overlap considerably with the so-called antidepressant "activation syndrome." Furthermore, the rare occurrence of suicidality on antidepressants should not obscure the fact that the advent of the new antidepressants is associated with worldwide decline in suicide rates. We finally wish to point out that our formal nosology (i.e. DSM-IV and ICD-10), in its failure to recognize the bipolar nature of depressive mixed states, thereby fails to shield pseudo-unipolar patients from antidepressant monotherapy, which is inappropriate for such patients.     

The DSM-IV and ICD-10 categories of recurrent [major] depressive and bipolar II disorders: evidence that they lie on a dimensional spectrum

BACKGROUND: Presently it is a hotly debated issue whether unipolar and bipolar disorders are categorically distinct or lie on a spectrum. We used the ongoing Ravenna-San Diego Collaboration database to examine this question with respect to major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar II (BP-II). METHODS: The study population in FB's Italian private practice setting comprised consecutive 650 outpatients presenting with major depressive episode (MDE) and ascertained by a modified version of the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV. Differential assignment of patients into MDD versus BP-II was made on the basis of discrete hypomanic episodes outside the timeframe of an MDE. In addition, hypomanic signs and symptoms during MDE (intra-MDE hypomania) were systematically assessed and graded by the Hypomania Interview Guide (HIG). The frequency distributions of the HIG total scores in each of the MDD, BP-II and the combined entire sample were plotted using the kernel density estimate. Finally, bipolar family history (BFH) was investigated by structured interview (the Family History Screen). RESULTS: There were 261 MDD and 389 BP-II. As in the previous smaller samples, categorically defined BP-II compared with MDD had significantly earlier age at onset, higher rates of familial bipolarity (mostly BP-II), history of MDE recurrences (>or=5), and atypical features. However, examining hypomania scores dimensionally, whether we examined the MDD, BP-II, or the combined sample, kernel density estimate distribution of these scores had a normal-like shape (i.e., no bimodality). Also, in the combined sample of MDE, we found a dose-response relationship between BFH loading and intra-MDE hypomania measured by HIG scores. LIMITATIONS: Although the interviewer (FB) could not be blind to the diagnostic status of his private patients, the systematic rigorous interview process in a very large clinical population minimized any unintended biases. CONCLUSIONS: Unlike previous studies that have examined the number of DSM-IV hypomanic signs and symptoms both outside and during MDE, the present analyses relied on the more precise hypomania scores as measured by the HIG. The finding of a dose-response relationship between BFH and HIG scores in the sample at large strongly suggests a continuity between BP-II and MDD. Our data indicate that even in those clinically depressed patients without past hypomanic episodes (so-called "unipolar" MDD), such scores are normally rather than bimodally distributed during MDE. Moreover, the absence of a 'zone of rarity' in the distribution of hypomanic scores in the combined total, MDD and BP-II MDE samples, indicates that MDD and BP-II exist on a dimensional spectrum. From a nosologic perspective, our data are contrary to what one would expect from a categorical unipolar-bipolar distinction. In practical terms, intra-MDE hypomania and BFH, especially in recurrent MDD, represent strong indicators of bipolarity.     

Association between the so-called “activation syndrome” and bipolar II disorder,a related disorder,and bipolar suggestive features in outpatients with depression

Background

Activation syndrome (AS) is a cluster of symptoms listed by the US Food and Drug Administration as possible suicidality precursors during antidepressant treatment. We aimed to clarify whether AS is associated with bipolar II disorder (BP-II) and its related disorder, i.e., bipolar disorder not otherwise specified (BP-NOS), which are often mistreated as major depressive disorder (MDD), as well as bipolar suggestive features in outpatients with depression.

Methods

The frequency of AS, bipolar suggestive features, and background variables in consecutive outpatients with a major depressive episode (MDE) due to BP-II/BP-NOS or MDD, who were naturalistically treated with antidepressants, were investigated and analyzed retrospectively.

Results

Of 157 evaluable patients (46 BP-II/BP-NOS, 111 MDD), 39 (24.8%) experienced AS. Patients with BP-II/BP-NOS experienced AS significantly more frequently than patients with MDD (52.2% of BP-II/BP-NOS vs. 13.5% of MDD, p<0.01). Univariate analysis revealed that BP-II/BP-NOS diagnosis, cyclothymic temperament, early age at onset of first MDE, psychiatric comorbidities, and depressive mixed state (DMX) were significantly associated with AS development in the entire sample. Multivariate analysis revealed that BP-II/BP-NOS diagnosis and DMX were independent risk factors for AS.

Limitations

This is a retrospective and naturalistic study; therefore, patient selection bias could have occurred.

Conclusions

Cautious monitoring of AS is needed during antidepressant trials in patients with BP-II/BP-NOS. Clinicians should re-evaluate underlying bipolarity when they confront AS. Antidepressants should be avoided for treating a current DMX beyond the unipolar–bipolar dichotomy. Prospective studies are needed to confirm these results.     

Family history validation of the bipolar nature of depressive mixed states

BACKGROUND: Recent data indicate that depressive mixed states (DMX), major depressive episode (MDE) plus few concurrent hypomanic symptoms are common in clinical practice but omitted in DSM-IV. Our aims were to find the sensitivity and specificity of DMX for the diagnosis of bipolar II disorder, and validate it against familial bipolarity. METHODS: 377 consecutive private outpatients presenting with psychoactive drug-free MDE were interviewed with the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (Clinician Version). History of past hypomanic episodes and presence of hypomanic symptoms during the index MDE were systematically recorded. Of these, 226 were bipolar II and 151 unipolar. DMX3 was defined as an MDE plus three or more intra-episodic hypomanic symptoms. RESULTS: DMX3 was present in 58.4% of bipolar II, and 23.1% of unipolar patients. It was significantly associated with variables distinguishing bipolar from strictly defined unipolar disorders (younger age at onset, more MDE recurrence, more atypical features, more bipolar II family history). Unipolar DMX3 (MDE with documented hypomania solely intra-episodically) was not significantly different from bipolar II MDE on age at onset, atypical features, and bipolar II family history. CONCLUSIONS: Results support the inclusion of DMX3 (bipolar II and 'unipolar') into the bipolar spectrum. Adding the 23% of the UP-DMX3 to the roster of less-than-manic outpatient depressives will boost the rate of bipolarity in this outpatient depressive population to a respectable 70%, the highest rate yet reported for the bipolar spectrum below the threshold of mania.     

The dark side of bipolarity: detecting bipolar depression in its pleomorphic expressions

The depressive expressions of bipolar disorders have long been neglected. Current data, from both clinical and epidemiologic studies, indicate that such expressions far exceed the manic forms in both cross-section and during follow-up course. Thus, mania occurs in 1% of the population at large; bipolar depression afflicts at least 5 times more people. Much of the new literature on this subject has emphasized its high prevalence, morbidity, and mortality. There has been relatively less attention paid to the phenomenology of bipolar depression as it presents clinically. This special issue (volume 84/2-3, 2005) is devoted to a systematic data-based in-depth examination of the different clinical expressions of bipolar depression including, among others, retarded depression, agitated and/or activated depression, mood-labile depression, irritable-hostile depression, atypical depression, anxious depression, depressive mixed state, and resistant depression. Both bipolar I (BP-I), and the more prevalent yet relatively understudied bipolar II (BP-II), are covered. We trust that this extensive coverage of the "darker" side of bipolarity will set the stage for a much needed renaissance in its complex phenotypic expressions-and its delimitation from unipolar depression (UP). The phenomenology of BP-I depression ranges from depressive stupor to agitated psychosis, whereas UP depression expresses itself in psychic anxiety, and insomnia, as well as retardation. BP-II compared with UP is more likely to have atypical features, mood lability, hostility, activation, biographical instability, multiple anxiety comorbidities, suicidal tendencies, and to be rated as less "objectively" depressed. These findings are complex and do not fully agree with the conventional characterization of BP as retarded and UP as anxious and agitated. The inconsistency between the conventional and the phenomenology described herein is largely due to depressive mixed states, which tend to destabilize BP-II, and may account for the "contradictory" relationships of affect, sleep, drive, and psychomotor activity in mood disorders.     

Major depressive disorder with anger: a bipolar spectrum disorder?

BACKGROUND: Depression with anger may be more common in bipolar disorders. The aim of the study was to assess whether major depressive disorder (MDD) with anger could be included in the bipolar spectrum, by comparing it to MDD without anger and to bipolar II disorder. METHODS: Consecutive outpatients (281 bipolar II disorder and 202 MDD) presenting for major depressive episode (MDE) treatment were interviewed with the DSM-IV structured clinical interview. Clinical variables used to support the inclusion of MDD with anger in the bipolar spectrum were age of onset, many MDE recurrences, atypical features of depression, depressive mixed state (an MDE plus some concurrent hypomanic symptoms), and bipolar family history. RESULTS: Frequency of MDE with anger was 50.5% [61.2% in bipolar II, and 35.6% in MDD (z = 5.5, p = 0.0000, 95% CI 16.8-43.3%)]. Logistic regression of MDE with anger (dependent variable) versus bipolar variables showed that MDE with anger was significantly associated with all bipolar variables, apart from recurrences. MDD with anger, compared with MDD without anger, had significantly lower age of onset, more marked depressive mixed state, a bipolar family history with more cases, but comparable atypical features and Global Assessment of Functioning scores. MDD with anger, compared with bipolar II disorder, had significantly higher age of onset, less atypical features, and a bipolar family history with less cases. CONCLUSIONS: MDE with anger was common in outpatients (more in bipolar II disorder). MDD with anger may be midway between MDD without anger and bipolar II disorder, and might be included into the bipolar spectrum. However, MDD with anger does not appear to be associated with the often reported negative response to monotherapy with antidepressants.     

The duration of hypomania in bipolar-II disorder in private practice: methodology and validation

BACKGROUND: DSM-IV 4-day minimum hypomania duration is not evidence-based. Epidemiologic data suggest that briefer hypomanias are prevalent in the community. We sought to find out the relative prevalence of short (2-3 days) versus long (>/=4 days) hypomanias in private practice. METHODS: 206 bipolar-II (BP-II) depressed outpatients (group B) and a group of 140 remitted BP-II (group R) were assessed with the DSM-IV Structured Clinical Interview, as modified by the authors. BP-II with short vs. longer hypomania were compared on such bipolar validators as early age at onset, depressive recurrence, atypical feature specifier, depressive mixed state and bipolar family history. In addition, to ascertain the bipolar status of depressed patients with brief hypomanias, we included a comparison group of 178 major depressive disorder (MDD) patients assessed when depressed. RESULTS: 27-30% of hypomanias (depending on whether assessment occurred when patients were depressed or in remission) had 2-3-day duration; 72% lasted less than 4 weeks. Except for the atypical feature specifier, BP-II with short vs. BP-II with longer hypomania were not significantly different on bipolar validators. Moreover, BP-II with short, like its longer hypomanic counterpart, was significantly different from the comparison MDD group on all bipolar indicators. LIMITATIONS: Single interviewer and retrospective evaluation of duration of hypomania. CONCLUSIONS: As BP-II patients almost never present clinically in a hypomanic episode, the retrospective assessment of the duration of these episodes is clinically unavoidable. Most hypomanias last from 2 days to a few weeks. BP-II with shorter vs. longer hypomanias had significantly higher rates of females, comorbidity and atypical features, but were otherwise indistinguishable on crucial bipolar validators. Furthermore, such validators, including bipolar family history, robustly distinguished BP-II with short hypomanias from the MDD group. The conservative 4-day threshold would misclassify one out of three BP-II as MDD. Such misclassification has relevant implications for treatment and outcome, as well as clinical research methodology for depressive and bipolar disorders.     

Is there a continuity between bipolar and depressive disorders?

BACKGROUND: Recent studies questioned the current categorical split of mood disorders into bipolar disorders (BP) and depressive disorders (MDD). METHODS: Medline database search of papers from the last 10 years on the categorical-dimensional classification of mood disorders. Various combinations of the following key words were used: mood disorders, bipolar, unipolar, major depressive disorder, spectrum, category/categorical, classification, continuity. Only English language clinical papers were included, review papers were excluded, similar papers selected by quality. The number of papers found was 1,141. The number of papers selected was 109. RESULTS: The continuity/spectrum between BP (mainly BP-II) and MDD was supported by the following findings:(1) high frequency of mixed states (mixed mania, mixed hypomania, mixed depression, i.e. co-occurring depression and noneuphoric manic/hypomanic symptoms) because opposite polarity symptoms in the same episode do not support a hypomania/mania-depression splitting; (2) MDD was the most common mood disorder in BP probands' relatives; (3) no bimodal distribution of distinguishing symptoms between BP and MDD; (4) bipolar signs not uncommon in MDD; (5) many MDD shifting to BP; (6) many lifetime manic/hypomanic symptoms in MDD; (7) correlation between lifetime manic/hypomanic symptoms and MDD symptoms; (8) hypomania factors in MDD; (9) MDD often recurrent; (10) similar cognitive style.The categorical distinction between BP (mainly BP-I) and MDD was supported by the following findings: (1) BP more common in BP probands' relatives; (2) lower age at BP onset; (3) females as common as males in BP-I, more common than males in MDD; (4) BP-I depression more atypical and retarded, MDD depression more sleepless and agitated; (5) BP more recurrent. CONCLUSIONS: Focusing on mood spectrum's extremes (BP-I vs. MDD), a categorical distinction seems supported. Focusing on midway disorders (BP-II and MDD plus bipolar signs), a continuity/spectrum seems supported. Results seem to support both a categorical and a dimensional view of mood disorders.     

Validating the bipolar spectrum in the French National EPIDEP Study: overview of the phenomenology and relative prevalence of its clinical prototypes

BACKGROUND: Few studies have been undertaken to ascertain the feasibility of using the bipolar (BP) spectrum in clinical practice. The only systematic national study is the French EPIDEP Study of consecutive inpatients and outpatients presenting with major depressive episodes (MDE). The protocol was developed in 1994 and implemented in 1995; publication of its first data began in 1998. This report provides the complete data set of the EPIDEP. METHODS: Forty-eight psychiatrists, practicing in 15 sites in four regions of France (Paris, Besan?on, Bordeaux and Marseille), were all trained on a common protocol based on DSM-IV criteria for MDE (n=537) subdivided into BP-I (history of mania), BP-II (history of hypomania), as well as extended definitions of the "softer spectrum" beyond BP-I and BP-II. Measures tapping into this spectrum included the Hypomania Checklist (HCA), the cyclothymic (CT), depressive (DT) and hyperthymic (HT) temperament scales. These measures and course permitted post-hoc assignment of MDE in the bipolar spectrum, based in part on the Akiskal, H.S., Pinto, O., 1999. [The evolving bipolar spectrum: Prototypes I, II, III, IV. Psychiatr. Clin. North Am. 22, 517-534] proposal: depression with history of spontaneous hypomanic episodes (DSM-IV, BP-II), cyclothymic depressions (BP-II(1/2)), antidepressant-associated hypomania (BP-III) and hyperthymic depressions (BP-IV). was thereby limited to an exclusion diagnosis for the remainder of MDE. LIMITATION: In the clinical setting, psychiatrists cannot be entirely blind to the observations in the various clinical evaluations and instruments. However, the systematic multisite collection of such data tended to minimize any such biases. RESULTS: After excluding patients lost to follow-up, among 493 presenting with MDE with complete data files, the BP-II rate was estimated at index at 20%; 1 month later, systematic probing for hypomania doubled the rate of BP-II to 39%. The comparison between BP-II and UP showed differential phenomenology, such as hypersomnia, increased psychomotor activation, guilt feelings and suicidal thoughts in BP-II. Related data demonstrated the importance of CT in further qualifying of MDE to define a distinct, more severe ("darker") BP-II(1/2) variant of BP-II. Moreover, BP-III, arising from DT and associated with antidepressants, emerged as a valid soft bipolar variant on the basis of the phenomenology of hypomania and bipolar family history. Finally, we found preliminary evidence for the inclusion of BP-IV into the bipolar spectrum, its total hypomania score falling intermediate between BP-II and strict UP. Using this broader diagnostic framework, the bipolar spectrum (the combined "hard" BP-I phenotype, BP-II and the soft spectrum) accounted for 65% of MDE. CONCLUSION: The EPIDEP study achieved its objectives by demonstrating the feasibility of identifying the bipolar spectrum at a national level, and refining its phenomenology through rigorous clinical characterization and validation of bipolar spectrum subtypes, including MDE with brief hypomanias, cyclothymia and hyperthymia. The spectrum accounted for two out of three MDE, making "strict UP" less prevalent than BP as redefined herein. Our findings were anticipated by Falret, who in 1854 had predicted that many melancholic patients in the community would 1 day be classified in his circular group. We also confirmed Baillarger's observation in the same year that episodes (in this study, hypomanic episodes) could last as short as 2 days. Our findings deriving from a systematic French national database a century and a half later invite major shifts in clinical and public health services, as well as in the future conduct of psychopharmacologic trials. In this respect, the systematic training of clinicians in four regions of France represents a national resource for affective disorders and can serve as a model to effect change in diagnostic practice in other countries.     

How best to identify a bipolar-related subtype among major depressive patients without spontaneous hypomania: superiority of age at onset criterion over recurrence and polarity?

BACKGROUND: History of high depressive recurrence (without history of mania/hypomania) has been proposed as a mood subtype close to bipolar disorders. Herein we test whether this is the best approach to this question. METHODS: We systematically evaluated consecutive 224 Major Depressive (MDD) and 336 Bipolar II Disorders (BP-II) outpatients in a private practice, by the SCID for DSM-IV (modified for better probing hypomania by Akiskal and Benazzi [Akiskal, H.S., Benazzi, F., 2005. Optimizing the detection of bipolar II disorder in outpatient private practice: toward a systematization of clinical diagnostic wisdom. J. Clin. Psychiatry 66, 914-921]). We conducted univariate and multivariate analyses on such putative bipolar validators as early age at onset of first major depressive episode (before 21 years), high recurrence, family history for bipolar disorders, and depressive mixed states (mixed depression, i.e. depression plus concurrent hypomanic symptoms), in order to identify an MDD subgroup close to BP-II. RESULTS: All bipolar validators were independent predictors of BP-II. Early onset was the only variable which identified an MDD subgroup significantly associated with all bipolar validators. This MDD subgroup was similar to BP-II on age at onset and bipolar family history, and had a high frequency of mixed depression. A dose-response relationship was found between number of bipolar validators present in MDD, and bipolar family history loading among MDD relatives. LIMITATIONS: Study limited to outpatients. CONCLUSIONS: From among the bipolar validators, early age at onset of first major depression (<21 years) was superior to high recurrence (>4 depressive episodes) in identifying an MDD subgroup close to BP-II, which might be subsumed under the broad bipolar spectrum. Implications of unipolar-bipolar boundaries and genetic investigations are discussed.     

Bipolar II with and without cyclothymic temperament: "dark" and "sunny" expressions of soft bipolarity

BACKGROUND: In the present report deriving from the French national multi-site EPIDEP study, we focus on the characteristics of Bipolar II (BP-II), divided on the basis of cyclothymic temperament (CT). In our companion article (Hantouche et al., this issue), we found that this temperament in its self-rated version correlated significantly with hypomanic behavior of a risk-taking nature. Our aim in the present analyses is to further test the hypothesis that such patients-assigned to CT on the basis of clinical interview-represent a more "unstable" variant of BP-II. METHODS: From a total major depressive population of 537 psychiatric patients, 493 were re-examined on average a month later; after excluding 256 DSM-IV MDD and 41 with history of mania, the remaining 196 were placed in the BP-II spectrum. As mounting international evidence indicates that hypomania associated with antidepressants belongs to this spectrum, such association per se did not constitute a ground for exclusion. CT was assessed by clinicians using a semi-structured interview based on in its French version; as two files did not contain full interview data on CT, the critical clinical variable in the present analyses, this left us with an analysis sample of 194 BP-II. Socio-demographic, psychometric, clinical, familial and historical parameters were compared between BP-II subdivided by CT. Psychometric measures included self-rated CT and hypomania scales, as well as Hamilton and Rosenthal scales for depression. RESULTS: BP-II cases categorically assigned to CT (n=74) versus those without CT (n=120), were differentiated as follows: (1). younger age at onset (P=0.005) and age at seeking help (P=0.05); (2). higher scores on HAM-D (P=0.03) and Rosenthal (atypical depressive) scale (P=0.007); (3). longer delay between onset of illness and recognition of bipolarity (P=0.0002); (4). higher rate of psychiatric comorbidity (P=0.04); (5). different profiles on axis II (i.e., more histrionic, passive-aggressive and less obsessive-compulsive personality disorders). Family history for depressive and bipolar disorders did not significantly distinguish the two groups; however, chronic affective syndromes were significantly higher in BP-II with CT. Finally, cyclothymic BP-II scored significantly much higher on irritable-risk-taking than "classic" driven-euphoric items of hypomania. CONCLUSION: Depressions arising from a cyclothymic temperament-even when meeting full criteria for hypomania-are likely to be misdiagnosed as personality disorders. Their high familial load for affective disorders (including that for bipolar disorder) validate the bipolar nature of these "cyclothymic depressions." Our data support their inclusion as a more "unstable" variant of BP-II, which we have elsewhere termed "BP-II 1/2." These patients can best be characterized as the "darker" expression of the more prototypical "sunny" BP-II phenotype. Coupled with the data from our companion paper (Hantouche et al., 2003, this issue), the present findings indicate that screening for cyclothymia in major depressive patients represents a viable approach for detecting a bipolar subtype that could otherwise be mistaken for an erratic personality disorder. Overall, our findings support recent international consensus in favoring the diagnosis of cyclothymic and bipolar II disorders over erratic and borderline personality disorders when criteria for both sets of disorders are concurrently met.     

Bipolar II vs. unipolar depression: psychopathologic differentiation by dimensional measures

BACKGROUND: Clinical presentations of depression in bipolar disorder are varied, inconsistent and often confusing. Most previous studies have focused on bipolar I (BP-I). Given that bipolar II (BP-II) is the more common bipolar phenotype, which is often confused with unipolar (UP), the aim of the current analyses is to delineate the symptomalogic differences between BP II vs. UP MDD in a large national sample. METHODS: The data derived from the French National EPIDEP study (n = 452 DSM-IV major depressives), subdivided into BP-II (n = 196) and UP (n = 256). The BP II group included major depressives with both spontaneous and antidepressant-associated hypomania based on our finding of similarity in rates of familial bipolarity in the two subgroups. At index presentation, depression was assessed by the clinician (using HAM-D and the Rosenthal Atypical Depression Scale) and by the patient (using the Multi-Visual Analog Scale of Bipolarity, MVAS-BP). Principal component analyses (PCA with varimax rotation) were conducted on HAM-D and MVAS-BP in the total population and separately in BP-II and UP. We performed inter-group comparative tests (UP vs. BP-II) on factorial scores derived from PCAs and correlation tests between these factorial scores. RESULTS: The PCA on "HAM-D + Rosenthal scale" showed the presence of nine major factors: F1-2 "weight changes", F3-4 "sleep disturbances", F5 "sadness-guilt", F6 "retardation-fatigue", F7 "somatic", F8 "diurnal variation" and F9 "insight-delusion". The PCA on MVAS-BP revealed the presence of eight principal components: F1 "psychomotor retardation", F2 "central pain", F3 "somatic", F4 "social contact", F5 "worry", F6 "loss of interest", F7 "guilt" and F8 "anger". Despite uniformity in global intensity of depression, significant differences were observed as follows: higher score on "psychomotor retardation" (p = 0.03), "loss of interest" (p = 0.057) and "insomnia" (p = 0.05) in the UP group, and higher score on "hypersomnia" (p = 0.008) in the BP-II group. Correlation analyses between clinician- and self-rating revealed the presence of higher number of significant coefficients in the UP vs. BP-II group (p < or =0.001). LIMITATION: A three-way comparison between BP-I, BP-II and UP may have yielded somewhat different results. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate greater psychomotor retardation, stability and uniformity in the clinical picture of strictly defined UP depression. By contrast, bipolar II depression appeared to be characterized, despite the hypersomnic tendency, by psychomotor activation. This would indicate greater mixed features than those observed in UP. Moreover, in BP-II, there was less agreement between clinician vs. self-rating on the presence of various features of depression. Taken together, these findings explain why BP-II depression is missed by clinicians as a genuine depression.     

The distinct temperament profiles of bipolar I, bipolar II and unipolar patients

BACKGROUND: Despite a plethora of studies, controversies abound on whether the long-term traits of unipolar and bipolar patients could be differentiated by temperament and whether these traits, in turn, could be distinguished from subthreshold affective symptomatology. METHODS: 98 bipolar I (BP-I), 64 bipolar II (BP-II), and 251 unipolar major depressive disorder (UP-MDD) patients all when recovered from discrete affective episodes) and 617 relatives, spouses or acquaintances without lifetime RDC diagnoses (the comparison group, CG) were administered a battery of 17 self-rated personality scales chosen for theoretical relevance to mood disorders. Subsamples of each of the four groups also received the General Behavior Inventory (GBI). RESULTS: Of the 436 personality items, 103 that significantly distinguished the three patient groups were subjected to principal components analysis, yielding four factors which reflect the temperamental dimensions of "Mood Lability", "Energy-Assertiveness," "Sensitivity-Brooding," and "Social Anxiety." Most BP-I described themselves as near normal in emotional stability and extroversion; BP-II emerged as labile in mood, energetic and assertive, yet sensitive and brooding; MDD were socially timid, sensitive and brooding. Gender and age did not have marked influence on these overall profiles. Within the MDD group, those with baseline dysthymia were the most pathological (i.e., high in neuroticism, insecurity and introversion). Selected GBI items measuring hypomania and biphasic mood changes were endorsed significantly more often by BP-II. Finally, it is relevant to highlight a methodologic finding about the precision these derived temperament factors brought to the UP-BP differentiation. Unlike BP-I who were low on neuroticism, both BP-II and UP scored high on this measure: yet, in the case of BP-II high neuroticism was largely due to mood lability, in UP it reflected subdepressive traits. LIMITATION: We used self-rated personality measures, a possible limitation generic to the paper-and-pencil personality literature. It is therefore likely that BP-I may have over-rated their "sanguinity"; or should one consider such self-report as a reliable reflection of one's temperament? One can raise similar unanswerable questions about "depressiveness" and "mood lability." CONCLUSION: As contrasted to CG and published norms, the postmorbid self-described "usual" personality is 1) sanguine among many, but not all, BP-I; 2) labile or cyclothymic among BP-II; and 3) subanxious and subdepressive among UP. It is further noteworthy that with the exception of BP-II, the temperament scores of BP-I and MDD were within one SD from published norms. Rather than being pathological, these attributes are best conceived as subclinical temperamental variants of the normal, thereby supporting the notion of continuity between interepisodic and episodic phases of affective disorders. These findings overall are in line with Kraepelin's views and contrary to the DSM-IV formulation of axis-II constructs as being pathological and sharply demarcated from affective episodes.     

Profiles of "manic" symptoms in bipolar I, bipolar II and major depressive disorders

BACKGROUND: Classical authors such as Kraepelin, as well as the emerging literature during the past decade, indicate that manic-like signs and symptoms are present to a variable degree in all mood disorders. Current nosography does not differentiate between them and only the number of symptoms or severity is used for classification. This is particularly true for mania and hypomania. This paper will analyze the patterns of manic symptoms in bipolar I (BP-I), bipolar II (BP-II) and major depressive disorders (MDD), to test the hypothesis that mania and hypomania have different profiles, and ascertain which excitatory manic phenomena do occur in unipolar MDD. METHODS: Six hundred and fifty-two inpatients (158 BP-I, 122 BP-II and 372 MDD) were assessed using the operational criteria for psychotic illness checklist (OPCRIT) [Arch. Gen. Psychiatry 48 (1991) 764] with a lifetime perspective. Manic or hypomanic symptoms were investigated and compared between BP-I, BP-II and MDD. RESULTS: When compared with BP-II, BP-I disorder had a higher prevalence of reckless activity, distractibility, psychomotor agitation, irritable mood and increased self-esteem. These five symptoms correctly classified 82.8% of BP-I and 80.1% of BP-II patients. One or two manic symptoms were observed in more than 30% of major depressive patients; psychomotor agitation was the most frequent manifestations present in 18% of the MDD group. LIMITATIONS: We did not control for severity of symptoms, nor for neuroleptic use that could produce akathisia. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that mania and hypomania can be differentiated in their symptom profiles, and highlights the presence of few manic symptoms, particularly psychomotor agitation, in MDD. From the standpoint of number of manic signs and symptoms, controlling for psychomotor agitation did not substantially change the predictive power of the remaining manic symptoms. Given that excitatory manic signs and symptoms are present to a decreasing degree in BP-I, BP-II and MDD, these disorders can be proposed to lie along a dimensional model. Overall, these data are compatible with the concept of a bipolar spectrum, whereby each of the affective subtypes requires specific genetic factors.     

Distinct seasonality of depressive episodes differentiates unipolar depressive patients with and without depressive mixed states

BACKGROUND: The bipolar nature of unipolar depression with depressive mixed states (DMX) needs further validation studies. The seasonality of depressive episodes is indicated to be different between unipolar and bipolar depressions. We therefore explored the seasonal pattern of depressive episodes in unipolar depressive patients with DMX. METHODS: The subjects were 958 consecutive depressive inpatients for a 6-year period. For defining DMX, previously validated operational criteria were used (2 or more of 8 manic or mania-related symptoms: flight of idea, logorrhea, aggression, excessive social contact, increased drive, irritability, racing thoughts, and distractibility). Onsets of the index depressive episodes during each of the 12 calendar months were summed up over the 6-year for bipolar depressive patients (N = 95), and unipolar depressive patients with (N = 77) and without DMX (N = 786) separately. An appropriate statistic was used for testing seasonality. RESULTS: A significant seasonal variation with a large peak in spring was recognized in unipolar depression without DMX, while both bipolar depression and unipolar depression with DMX had a significant fall peak. The monthly distribution of depressive episodes was significantly different between unipolar depression without DMX and other 2 diagnostic categories. Similar results were obtained in separate analyses for each gender. LIMITATIONS: Further replication study using an epidemiological or outpatient sample is needed. Bipolar I and II patients were combined due to a small number of bipolar II patients in this sample. CONCLUSION: Unipolar depression with DMX has a seasonal pattern similar to bipolar depression. The finding provides further evidence of the bipolar nature of unipolar depression with DMX.     

Factor structure of hypomania: interrelationships with cyclothymia and the soft bipolar spectrum

BACKGROUND: No systematic data exists on the phenomenology and psychometric aspects of hypomania. In this report we focus on the factor structure of hypomania and its relationships with cyclothymic temperament in unipolar (UP) and bipolar II (BP-II) spectrum (soft bipolar) patients. METHOD: The combined sample of UP and BP-II spectrum patients (n=427) derives from the French National multi-center study (EPIDEP). The study involved training 48 psychiatrists at 15 sites in France in a protocol based on DSM-IV phenomenological criteria for major depressive disorder, hypomania, and BP-II, as well as a broadened definition of soft bipolarity. Psychometric measures included Angst's Hypomania Checklist (HCA) and Akiskal's Cyclothymic Temperament (CT) Questionnaires. RESULTS: In the combined sample of the UP and BP-II spectrum, the factor pattern based on the HCA was characterized by the presence of one hypomanic component. In the soft bipolar group (n=191), two components were identified before and after varimax rotation. The first factor (F-1) identified hypomania with positive (driven-euphoric) features, and the second factor (F-2) hypomania with greater irritability and risk-taking. In exploratory analyses, both factors of hypomania tentatively distinguished most soft BP subtypes from UP. However, F-1 was generic across the soft spectrum, whereas F-2 was rather specific for II-1/2 (i.e., BP-II arising from CT). CT, which was found to conform to a single factor among the soft bipolar patients, was significantly correlated only with irritable risk-taking hypomania (F-2). LIMITATION: In a study conducted in a clinical setting, psychiatrists cannot be kept blind of the data revealed in the various clinical evaluations and instruments. However, the systematic collection of all data tended to minimize biases. CONCLUSION: EPIDEP data revealed a dual structure of hypomania with 'classic' driven-euphoric contrasted with irritable risk-taking expressions distributed differentially across the soft bipolar spectrum. Only the latter correlated significantly with cyclothymic temperament, suggesting the hypothesis that repeated brief swings into hypomania tend to destabilize soft bipolar conditions.     

The HCL-32: towards a self-assessment tool for hypomanic symptoms in outpatients

BACKGROUND: Bipolar disorders (BP) are frequently diagnosed and treated as pure depression initially; accurate diagnosis often being delayed by 8 to 10 years. In prospective studies, the presence of hypomanic symptoms in adolescence is strongly predictive of later bipolar disorders. As such, an instrument for self-assessment of hypomanic symptoms might increase the detection of suspected and of manifest, but under-treated, cases of bipolar disorders. METHODS: The multi-lingual hypomania checklist (HCL-32) has been developed and is being tested internationally. This preliminary paper reports the performance of the scale in distinguishing individuals with BP (N=266) from those with major depressive disorder (MDD; N=160). The samples were adult psychiatry patients recruited in Italy (N=186) and Sweden (N=240). RESULTS: The samples reported similar clinical profiles and the structure for the HCL-32 demonstrated two main factors identified as "active/elated" hypomania and "risk-taking/irritable" hypomania. The HCL-32 distinguished between BP and MDD with a sensitivity of 80% and a specificity of 51%. LIMITATIONS: Although the HCL-32 is a sensitive instrument for hypomanic symptoms, it does not distinguish between BP-I and BP-II disorders. CONCLUSIONS: Future studies should test if different combinations of items, possibly recording the consequences of hypomania, can distinguish between these BP subtypes.