An Open Trial of Olanzapine in the Treatment of Patients with Psychotic Depression

Compared to major depression without psychosis, psychotic depression often responds poorly to treatment with tricyclic antidepressants alone. Atypical antipsychotics, which appear to possess thymoleptic properties, may represent a new treatment alternative for patients with psychotic mood disorders. This open-label, pilot study evaluated the efficacy of olanzapine monotherapy in patients with psychotic depression. Seven inpatients who met DSM-IV criteria for a major depressive episode (unipolar) with psychotic features participated in a 10-week open-label trial of olanzapine 10–20 mg/day. The Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD), the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS), and the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) were performed at each visit to evaluate clinical response. Four out of the 5 study completers responded during the trial. Overall, there was a statistically significant change between baseline and final visit on the SAPS, HRSD, and the CGI Scale (p < .001). The results of this pilot study suggest that olanzapine may be an effective treatment for some patients with unipolar psychotic depression. However, these observations require replication in randomized, controlled trials.     

Clozapine in the treatment of refractory psychotic mania

OBJECTIVE: The efficacy of clozapine was examined in a group of patients with treatment-refractory bipolar disorder, manic type with psychotic features.METHOD: Twenty-two subjects with treatment-refractory bipolar disorder with active manic and psychotic symptoms participated in a 12-week open-label trial of clozapine. After a 2-10-day drug washout period, patients began treatment with clozapine at 25 mg/day; the dose was increased 25 mg/day (as tolerated) to a maximum level of 550 mg/day. Patients were evaluated longitudinally over the course of the study with the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS), the Young Mania Rating Scale, and the Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale.RESULTS: Fourteen of the 22 subjects in the study continued taking clozapine for at least 10 of the 12 weeks. Among the entire group, mean improvements of 56. 7%, 56.6%, and 39.1% were seen on the BPRS, Young Mania Rating Scale, and CGI, respectively. Seventeen of the 22 subjects (77.3%) experienced at least a 20% improvement in scores on all three scales. CONCLUSIONS: The findings from this open-label study, which are consistent with previous retrospective studies, case reports, and one other open-label prospective study, suggest that clozapine is an effective agent for patients with treatment-refractory psychotic mania.     

A Naturalistic, Single-blind Comparison of Rapid Dose Administration of Divalproex ER Versus Quetiapine in Patients with Acute Bipolar Mania

Objective: When treating acute bipolar mania, the speed of onset of anti-manic effects is crucial. Quetiapine and divalproex ER are widely used agents to treat acute mania. Rapid dose administration regimens for divalproex ER and for quetiapine have been described. We conducted a naturalistic, head-to-head, pilot study comparing the efficacy and safety of rapidly titrated divalproex ER and quetiapine in acutely manic inpatients, with the primary outcome being improvement within the first seven days.Method: Thirty consenting bipolar patients with acute mania (Young Mania Rating Scale >17 ) needing hospitalization due to acute mania were randomized to receive rapidly loaded divalproex ER (30mg/kg/day) or rapidly titrated quetiapine (200mg Day 1, raised by 200mg/day up to 800mg as tolerated). Assessments were made on Day 1 (baseline), Day 3, Day 7, Day 14, and Day 21 and included Young Mania Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impressions-Severity, Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement, and Montgomery-Asberg Depression Rating Scale. Raters but not patients or treating physicians were blinded (single-blinded study).Results: Subjects in both treatment groups exhibited significant and rapid improvement in their mania starting at Day 3 with few significant adverse effects; however, there were no significant differences in the degree or rate of improvement between the two treatment groups in any of the efficacy or adverse effects scales.Conclusion: Results of this small study indicate that rapid-dose administration of both quetiapine and divalproex ER produce rapid improvement in acute mania within the first seven days and both seem to be well tolerated.     

Safety and tolerability of oral loading divalproex sodium in acutely manic bipolar patients

BACKGROUND: Achieving therapeutic blood levels of a mood stabilizer as quickly as possible is desirable in patients with acute mania. We examined the feasibility and safety of an accelerated oral loading strategy (divalproex, 30 mg/kg/day, on days 1 and 2, followed by 20 mg/kg/day on days 3-10) designed to bring serum valproate concentrations to therapeutic levels (i.e., above 50 microg/mL). METHOD: Fifty-nine patients who met DSM-IV diagnostic criteria for current manic episode and who had a Mania Rating Scale score > or = 14 were randomly assigned on a double-blind basis to receive divalproex oral loading (N = 20); divalproex nonloading (N = 20) at a starting dose of 250 mg t.i.d. on days 1 and 2, followed by standard dose titration for days 3 to 10; or lithium carbonate (N = 19) at a starting dose of 300 mg t.i.d., followed by standard dose titration for days 3 to 10. RESULTS: Eighty-four percent of the divalproex-loading patients, but only 30% of the divalproex-nonloading patients, had valproate serum levels above 50 microg/mL at day 3 of the study. None of the lithium-treated patients had serum lithium levels above 0.8 mEq/L at study day 3. No patient was removed from the study because of an adverse event. There were no significant differences between the groups in the frequencies or types of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Accelerated oral loading with divalproex sodium is a feasible and safe method to bring serum valproate concentrations to effective levels rapidly.     

Ritanserin as an adjunct to lithium and haloperidol for the treatment of medication-naive patients with acute mania: a double blind and placebo controlled trial

Background

Bipolar disorder is a lifelong episodic condition characterized by mood swings between mania and depression. Several lines of evidence suggest that serotonin is likely to play a pivotal role in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder. Ritanserin, a 5-HT₂ receptor antagonist, has been reported to have antipsychotic activity. In this 6-week double blind, placebo controlled study involving moderate to severe manic patients, we assessed the effects of ritanserin plus haloperidol in combination with lithium.

Methods

45 patients aged between 21–43 were eligible to participate as they met the DSM-IV criteria for a current manic episode, on the basis of a clinical interview by an academician psychiatrist. In addition, a score of at least 20 points on the Young Mania rating Scale was required representing moderate to severe mania. Patients were randomly allocated lithium (1–1.2 mEq/L) + haloperidol (10 mg/day)+ ritanserin (10 mg/day) (Group A) or lithium (1–1.2 mEq/L)+ haloperidol (10 mg/day) + placebo (Group B) for a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Patients were assessed by a third year psychiatry resident at baseline and 3, 7, 14, 21, 28 and 42 days after the medication started. All patients entered the hospital were not previously under any medication. The mean decrease in the Young Mania Rating Scale score from baseline was used as the main outcome measure of response of mania to treatment. The extrapyramidal symptoms were assessed using the Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale. Side effects were systematically recorded throughout the study and were assessed using a checklist.

Results

Young Mania Rating Scale total scores improved with ritanserin. The difference between the two protocols was significant as indicated by the effect of group and the between-subjects factor (F = 5.02, d.f. = 1, P = 0.03). The means Extrapyramidal Symptoms Rating Scale scores for the placebo group were higher than the ritanserin group and the difference was significant in day 42. The difference between the two groups in the frequency of side effects was not significant

Conclusions

The efficacy of ritanserin to obtain a better improvement in patients with mania seems to support the 5-HT hypothesis of bipolar disorder.

     

Combination of a mood stabilizer with risperidone or haloperidol for treatment of acute mania: a double-blind,placebo-controlled comparison of efficacy and safety

OBJECTIVE: The study assessed the efficacy and safety of risperidone as an adjunctive agent to mood stabilizers in the treatment of acute mania. METHOD: This 3-week randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 156 bipolar disorder patients with a current manic or mixed episode who received a mood stabilizer (lithium or divalproex) and placebo, risperidone, or haloperidol. The primary efficacy measure was the Young Mania Rating Scale. Other assessments used the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, the Clinical Global Impression scale, and safety measures. RESULTS: The trial was discontinued by 25 (49%) of the 51 placebo group patients, 18 (35%) of the 52 risperidone group patients, and 28 (53%) of the 53 haloperidol group patients. Mean modal doses were 3.8 mg/day (SD=1.8) of risperidone and 6.2 mg/day (SD=2.9) of haloperidol. Significantly greater reductions in Young Mania Rating Scale scores at endpoint and over time were seen in the risperidone group and in the haloperidol group, compared with the placebo group. Young Mania Rating Scale total scores improved with risperidone and with haloperidol both in patients with psychotic features and in those without psychotic features at baseline. Extrapyramidal Symptom Rating Scale total scores at endpoint were significantly higher in the haloperidol patients than in the placebo patients. Antiparkinsonian medications were received by 8%, 17%, and 38% of patients in the placebo, risperidone, and haloperidol groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Risperidone plus a mood stabilizer was more efficacious than a mood stabilizer alone, and as efficacious as haloperidol plus a mood stabilizer, for the rapid control of manic symptoms and was well tolerated.     

A pilot study of loading versus titration of valproate in the treatment of acute mania

Objective:  This double-blind pilot study compares the effectiveness and incidence of adverse effects of oral loading versus titration schedules of valproate in acute mania.
Method:  Consecutive new admissions for an acute manic episode were prescribed either an oral loading dose (20 mg/kg/day; n=5; mean age=33.4) or slower titration dose (10 mg/kg/day; n=6, mean age=30.6) of valproate for 7 days without other psychotropic agents, with the exception of benzodiazepines. Daily outcome measures included: serum valproic acid levels, the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), the Brief Psychiatry Rating Scale (BPRS), the Clinical Global Impression Scale (CGI) and the Adverse Effect Rating Scale.
Results:  The mean serum valproic acid levels were significantly higher in the loading group when compared with the titration group after 1 and 2 days following the initiation of treatment (p < 0.05). After 3 days of treatment there was a trend for the group that received the loading regimen to have slightly more improvement in YMRS scores compared with the titration group. Side-effects were minor for both treatments, however, a higher incidence of side-effects was reported in the titration group, with 50% of patients reporting sedation most likely because of increased use of benzodiazepines.
Conclusion:  This suggests that a loading dose of valproate is likely safe and may provide an earlier onset of antimanic effects in patients with bipolar disorder. Future studies with larger sample sizes are indicated.     

Relationship of lithium chloride dose to treatment response in acute mania

Three separate lithium chloride doses, calculated according to body weight, and a placebo were administered under double-blind conditions to 68 manic inpatients. The relationship of lithium chloride treatment dose to steady-state serum lithium levels (day 7 to 10 of treatment) and clinical response were examined. High (0.72 mEq/kg/day) and medium (0.5 mEq/kg/day) lithium chloride doses were more efficacious than placebo (P<.001 and P<.05, respectively), as determined by decrements in global mania ratings (day 7 to 10 of treatment). A low dose (0.24 mEq/kg/day) was not found to be more efficacious than placebo. The proportion of patients with improved manic ratings increased markedly as a function of increased steady-state serum lithium level(chi-squared for trend in proportions, 17.91; P<.001).     

Olanzapine versus lithium in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder: a 12-month, randomized, double-blind, controlled clinical trial

OBJECTIVE: The authors compared the efficacy of olanzapine and lithium in the prevention of mood episode relapse/recurrence. METHOD: Patients with a diagnosis of bipolar disorder (manic/mixed), a history of two or more manic or mixed episodes within 6 years, and a Young Mania Rating Scale total score > or =20 entered the study and received open-label co-treatment with olanzapine and lithium for 6-12 weeks. Those meeting symptomatic remission criteria (Young Mania Rating Scale score < or =12; 21-item Hamilton depression scale score < or =8) were randomly assigned to 52 weeks of double-blind monotherapy with olanzapine, 5-20 mg/day (N=217), or lithium (target blood level: 0.6-1.2 meq/liter) (N=214). RESULTS: Symptomatic relapse/recurrence (score > or =15 on either the Young Mania Rating Scale or Hamilton depression scale) occurred in 30.0% of olanzapine-treated and 38.8% of lithium-treated patients. The noninferiority of olanzapine relative to lithium (primary objective) in preventing relapse/recurrence was met, since the lower limit of the 95% confidence interval on the 8.8% risk difference (-0.1% to 17.8%) exceeded the predefined noninferiority margin (-7.3%). Secondary results showed that compared with lithium, olanzapine had significantly lower risks of manic episode and mixed episode relapse/recurrence. Depression relapse/recurrence occurred in 15.7% of olanzapine-treated and 10.7% of lithium-treated patients. Mean weight gain during open-label co-treatment was 2.7 kg; during double-blind monotherapy, weight gain was significantly greater with olanzapine (1.8 kg) than with lithium (-1.4 kg). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that olanzapine was significantly more effective than lithium in preventing manic and mixed episode relapse/recurrence in patients acutely stabilized with olanzapine and lithium co-treatment. Both agents were comparable in preventing depression relapse/recurrence.     

Zotepine loading in acute and severely manic patients: a pilot study

OBJECTIVES: In clinical practice patients with severe mania (agitation, insomnia and aggressive behaviour) still receive effective, but often not well tolerated typical antipsychotics. The aim of this study was to test the first-generation atypical antipsychotic zotepine regarding its antimanic efficacy, tolerability and to find an adequate dosage for a loading strategy. METHOD: Twelve patients (seven male) with an acute and severe manic episode, according to DSM-IV, received zotepine loading in individual dosages (up to 600 mg/day) over a maximum period of 3 weeks. Clinical efficacy was measured using the Young-Mania Rating Scale (Y-MRS) total score. Response was defined as a 50% reduction in the Y-MRS score. Safety was assessed by systematic collection of data on side effects and weight; Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) scores were used to detect a switch into depression. RESULTS: Two patients dropped out of the study after 2 days. Nine of ten patients (baseline mean Y-MRS: 45 +/- 7) were classified as responders, with five of them responding within 4 days. One patient did not respond sufficiently. No switch into a depressive episode occurred. CONCLUSIONS: This open pilot study suggests that zotepine with a median daily dosage of 250 mg/day is effective with a rapid therapeutic effect in severely manic patients. In general, patients tolerated the drug well; dose-dependent extrapyramidal side effects, an increase in weight and autonomic side effects occurred to a lesser degree. This is the first study assessing zotepine monotherapy in manic patients. Controlled studies are warranted.     

Olanzapine versus divalproex in the treatment of acute mania

OBJECTIVE: The effects of olanzapine and divalproex for the treatment of mania were compared in a large randomized clinical trial. METHOD: A 3-week, randomized, double-blind trial compared flexibly dosed olanzapine (5-20 mg/day) to divalproex (500-2500 mg/day in divided doses) for the treatment of patients hospitalized for acute bipolar manic or mixed episodes. The Young Mania Rating Scale and the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale were used to quantify manic and depressive symptoms, respectively. Safety was assessed with several measures. RESULTS: The protocol defined baseline-to-endpoint improvement in the mean total score on the Young Mania Rating Scale as the primary outcome variable. The mean Young Mania Rating Scale score decreased by 13.4 for patients treated with olanzapine (N=125) and 10.4 for those treated with divalproex (N=123). A priori categorizations defined response and remission rates: 54.4% of olanzapine-treated patients responded (> or = 50% reduction in Young Mania Rating Scale score), compared to 42.3% of divalproex-treated patients; 47.2% of olanzapine-treated patients had remission of mania symptoms (endpoint Young Mania Rating Scale < or = 12), compared to 34.1% of divalproex-treated patients. The decrease in Hamilton depression scale score was similar in the two treatment groups. Completion rates for the 3-week study were similar in both groups. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (incidence >10%) occurring more frequently during treatment with olanzapine were dry mouth, increased appetite, and somnolence. For divalproex, nausea was more frequently observed. The average weight gain with olanzapine treatment was 2.5 kg, compared to 0.9 kg with divalproex treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The olanzapine treatment group had significantly greater mean improvement of mania ratings and a significantly greater proportion of patients achieving protocol-defined remission, compared with the divalproex treatment group. Significantly more weight gain and cases of dry mouth, increased appetite, and somnolence were reported with olanzapine, while more cases of nausea were reported with divalproex.     

Antimanic efficacy of topiramate in 11 patients in an open trial with an on-off-on design

BACKGROUND: A series of open studies suggests that topiramate has efficacy in bipolar disorder. To further investigate the potential value of topiramate as an antimanic agent, we conducted an open trial in 11 manic patients. METHOD: Eleven patients with bipolar I disorder with an acute manic episode (DSM-IV) were treated with a mood stabilizer and/or antipsychotics in sufficient and fixed doses. All had a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score of at least 24 (mean +/- SD = 33.5+/-8.1). Topiramate was added after stable plasma levels of concomitant mood stabilizers had been reached and was titrated within 1 week to a final dose in the range of 25 to 200 mg/day, depending on clinical efficacy and tolerability. Topiramate was discontinued after 10 days, while concomitant medication remained unchanged. After 5 days, topiramate was reintroduced at similar or increased dosages for another 7 days. Patients were assessed with the YMRS; the Clinical Global Impressions scale version for bipolar patients; and the 21-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression. RESULTS: Seven of the 11 patients initially showed a good antimanic response with > 50% reduction in YMRS score. One patient showed psychotic features following rapid increase in topiramate dosage and dropped out on day 10. After discontinuation of topiramate, 7 of the remaining 10 patients worsened (increase of > or = 25% in YMRS score), 2 remained stable, and 1 discontinued follow-up after good recovery. After reintroducing topiramate, all patients improved again within a week, with 8 of 9 meeting the responder criterion of > or = 50% YMRS score reduction when comparing baseline values with those of day 22. With the exception of the patient who developed psychosis, topiramate was well tolerated. Concomitant medication did not interfere with plasma levels of drug, except for carbamazepine level in 1 patient. CONCLUSION: The antimanic response among patients in this study appears reproducibly linked to the addition of topiramate.     

Clozapine in adolescent inpatients with acute mania

Some bipolar patients with acute manic episodes can be refractory to conventional treatment with mood stabilizers. Clozapine, an atypical antipsychotic, has been reported to be effective in adults with treatment-resistant bipolar disorder. We describe the therapeutic effect of clozapine in 10 adolescent inpatients (12- to 17-year-olds) with severe acute manic or mixed episodes who did not improve after treatment with conventional drugs (mood stabilizers, antipsychotics). At hospital discharge, 15 to 28 days after clozapine treatment, all patients had responded positively according to the Clinical Global Impression-Improvement Scale scores. The mean changes in Mania Rating Scale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Children's Global Assessment Scale, and Clinical Global Impression-Severity Scale were significant (p < 0.001). Clozapine dosage was 142.5 +/- 73.6 mg/day (range 75-300 mg/day). Side effects (increased appetite, sedation, enuresis, sialorrhea) were frequent but not severe enough to require reduction of dosage. Mean weight gain after 6 months was 6.96 +/- 3.08 kg (10.7%). Neither decrease of white cells nor epileptic seizures were reported during follow-up (12-24 months). These preliminary findings suggest that clozapine may improve the clinical picture in adolescents with treatment-refractory manic or mixed episodes. Controlled studies on larger samples are warranted.     

A 10-Week Memantine Treatment in Bipolar Depression: A Case Report. Focus on Depressive Symptomatology,Cognitive Parameters and Quality of Life

Memantine and other glutamatergic agents have been currently investigated in some off-label indications due to glutamatergic involvement in several psychoneurological disorders. We assumed that memantine similarly to ketamine may positively influence mood, moreover having a potential to improve cognition and general quality of life. We report a case of a 49-year-old male hospitalized during a manic and a subsequent moderate depressive episode. After an ineffective use of lithium, olanzapine and antidepressive treatment with mianserin, memantine was added up to 20 mg per day for 10 weeks. The mental state was assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, the Young Mania Rating Scale, the Hamilton Anxiety Scale, the Clinical Global Inventory, the World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale and psychological tests. After 10 weeks the patient achieved a partial symptomatic improvement in mood, anxiety and quality of sleep, but his activity remained insufficient. We also observed an improvement in the parameters of cognitive functioning and quality of life. There was neither significant mood variations during the memantine use nor mood changes after its termination. No significant side effects were noted during the memantine treatment. We conclude that using memantine in bipolar depression may improve mood, cognitive functioning and quality of life.     

A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of adjunctive donepezil in treatment-resistant mania

INTRODUCTION: Because there is a high rate of partial response to standard thymoleptic medication, novel augmentation strategies for treatment-resistant bipolar disorder are needed. In an open trial, donepezil augmentation was associated with improvement in manic symptoms in 9 of 11 subjects. METHOD: We conducted a 6-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of donepezil for treatment-resistant bipolar mania. Eligible subjects had a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score of at least 15 despite two or more weeks of proven therapeutic levels of lithium or valproate. Subjects who completed the trial were eligible for an 8-week open trial of donepezil. Subjects were started on donepezil 5 mg/day and were eligible for dose increase to 10 mg/day after 4 weeks. RESULTS: Twelve subjects were enrolled. Eleven subjects received at least 1 week of study medication and were included in the analysis. No subjects in the donepezil group (0/6) and 60% (3/5) in the placebo group met response criteria of >30% reduction in YMRS score (Fisher's Exact p = 0.061). YMRS scores were higher at trial endpoint in the donepezil group 20.17 (3.66) compared with the placebo group [11.20 (4.60), Z = -2.476, p = 0.01]. There were no differences at trial endpoint in Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D) or Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) scores in either the intent-to-treat or the completer analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Donepezil does not appear to be an effective adjunctive treatment for refractory manic symptoms. The strength of the conclusion of this trial is limited by the possibility of a false-negative result due to the small sample.     

有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者近期疗效比较

目的比较单一经典抗精神病药物（奋乃静）或心境稳定剂（碳酸锂）合并小剂量经典抗精神病药物（奋乃静）治疗有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者的疗效和安全性;探讨影响患者近期疗效的主要因素。方法（1）将符合入组标准的精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者70例随机分为甲组34例和乙组36例两组进行为期6周治疗。甲组为单一中至大剂量经典抗精神病药物（奋乃静）治疗;乙组为心境稳定剂（碳酸锂）合并中至小剂量经典抗精神病药物（奋乃静）治疗。以Bech—Rafaelsen躁狂量表（BRMs）和临床总体印象量表（CGI）评定患者的疗效,以不良反应症状量表（TESS）评定患者的副反应;（2）采用临床流行病学方法,探讨影响有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者近期疗效的主要因素。结果（1）在治疗第6周末,甲组患者的临床治愈率38．2％,有效率94．1％（33／34）;乙组的临床治愈率63．9％,有效率100％（36／36）,乙组在临床疗效及药物不良反应上均显著性优于甲组（P〈0．05）;（2）有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者的近期疗效好,影响有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者近期疗效的主要因素为患者的起病年龄、病前社会功能、病程特点及患者的精神病性症状与心境的协调性,以急性起病、病前社会功能良好、间歇性病程及患者的精神病性症状与患者心境相协调者的近期疗效为佳。结论（1）心境稳定剂合并小剂量经典抗精神病药物在治疗有精神病性症状的躁狂发作时,临床疗效优于单一经典抗精神病药物治疗且副反应相对少;（2）有精神病性症状的躁狂发作患者的近期疗效好,患者的近期疗效受多种因素的影响。     

Quetiapine in combination with citalopram in patients with unipolar psychotic depression

This 6-week, open-label, multicenter study evaluated the efficacy and safety of quetiapine in combination with citalopram in adult patients (n=25) with ICD-10/DSM-IV unipolar psychotic depression. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to Week 6 in the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAM-D-21) score. Secondary endpoints were change from baseline to Week 6 in the Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale (BPRS) and the Clinical Global Impression (CGI) Scale scores. Spontaneously reported adverse events (AEs), the Simpson Angus Scale (SAS), and the Udvalg for Kliniske Undersogelser (UKU) side effects rating scale scores were recorded. Patients' average age was 51.4 years and baseline weight was 72.6 kg. Quetiapine (50-750 mg/day, mean dose+/-SD: 303+/-118 mg/day), in combination with citalopram (20-60 mg/day, mean dose+/-SD: 34+/-12 mg/day), provided significant improvements in depression. Mean (+/- SD) HAM-D-21 was reduced to 13.25+/-10.87 at Week 6 from a baseline value of 31.21+/-5.18. Significant improvement of psychotic symptoms (mean+/-SD) was indicated by the decrease from baseline (59.25+/-6.60) to Week 6 (35.25+/-15.60) in BPRS scores. No serious AEs occurred. The mean change in weight was +2.1 kg. Mean (+/- SD) weight at visit 1 was 72.72 (+/-16.34) kg and mean (SD) weight at visit 4 was 74.79 (+/-18.69) kg. Quetiapine in combination with citalopram appears to be effective and is well tolerated in the treatment of unipolar psychotic depression. Further studies of larger, double-blind, parallel-group design are warranted to confirm these findings.     

Efficacy and safety of risperidone in the treatment of schizoaffective disorder: initial results from a large, multicenter surveillance study. Group for the Study of Risperidone in Affective Disorders (GSRAD)

BACKGROUND: An adequate therapy for psychotic disorders needs to be effective against mood as well as psychotic symptoms. Analyses of data from clinical trials of risperidone in schizophrenia and small open-label studies in mania suggest that risperidone may have this broad efficacy profile. We present data on a 6-week trial of risperidone for the treatment of schizoaffective disorder that was part of a larger, 6-month surveillance study of patients with affective disorders. METHOD: One hundred two patients suffering from schizoaffective disorder (DSM-IV or ICD-10) entered the trial. Inclusion criteria consisted of a current DSM-IV diagnosis of schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type; DSM-IV manic or mixed psychotic episode; and a Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) score > 7 for a mixed episode (> 20 for a manic episode). Assessments included the YMRS, the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), the Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HAM-D), the 4-item Clinical Global Impressions (CGI) scale, and the UKU Side Effect Rating Scale subscale for neurologic side effects. For patients entering the study, open-label risperidone therapy was added to their existing regimens of mood-stabilizing treatments. Other antipsychotic drugs were not allowed. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients completed the 6-week trial. At week 6, the mean +/- SD dose of risperidone was 4.7+/-2.5 mg/day. The mean scores on the assessment scales at baseline and week 6 (unless otherwise stated) were as follows: YMRS, 22.7 and 4.7, an improvement of 18.0 points (p < .0001); PANSS (at baseline and week 4), 74.1 and 54.2, an improvement of 19.9 points (p < .0001); HAM-D, 14.0 and 7.4, an improvement of 6.6 points (p < .0001); CGI (at baseline and week 4), 2.6 and 1.7, an improvement of 0.9 points (p < .0001). At week 4, most patients had shown improvement in symptom severity, and 9.3% were completely symptom-free. There were no statistically significant differences between baseline and week 4 in the severity of extrapyramidal symptoms as measured by the UKU. Risperidone was well tolerated; side effects were few and generally mild. CONCLUSION: The results to date with risperidone indicate that it may have both antipsychotic and mood-stabilizing properties. Despite the limitations of the open-label design, the results indicate that risperidone is a safe and effective therapy in combination with mood-stabilizers for the treatment of patients with manic, hypomanic, and depressive symptoms of mixed episodes in schizoaffective disorder, bipolar type.     

Is psychosis in DSM‐IV mania due to severity? The relevance of selected demographic and comorbid social‐phobic features

Objective: We tested whether factors other than episode severity contributed to psychosis in mania. Method: Psychiatrists collected systematic clinical data on 1090 hospitalized DSM‐IV manic patients in France, and completed the Mania Rating Scale (MRS) and the Scale for the Assessment of Positive Symptoms (SAPS). Results: Using DSM‐IV specifiers, 21.9% were non‐severe, 28.2% severe without psychosis, and 49.9% severe with psychosis. On the MRS, patients with psychosis scored significantly higher (P < 0.0001) than non‐severe, but did not differ from the severe without psychosis. We found significant correlations between both the Hallucination and the Delusion subscores of the SAPS and the MRS, as well as correlations between age, single marital status, comorbid social phobia and psychotic mania. Conclusion: Apart from episode severity, social isolation – associated with younger age, single marital status and social phobia – seems to make a contribution to the origin of manic psychosis largely independent from such severity.     

Lamotrigine Compared with Lithium in Mania: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Preliminary data from case reports and small open trials suggest a role for lamotrigine in the treatment of bipolar disorder, although controlled data for the manic phase are lacking. Method: Thirty inpatients with a DSM-IV diagnosis of bipolar I disorder, currently manic, were randomly allocated to receive either lamotrigine (25 mg once daily for 1 week, 50 mg once daily for the second week, and 100 mg once daily for the last 2 weeks) or lithium (400 mg twice daily) in a 4-week randomized, double-blind, clinical trial. Results: Both treatments improved symptoms of mania, as assessed by the Mania Rating Scale, Brief Psychiatric Rating Scale, Clinical Global Impression severity and improvement scales, and the Global Assessment of Functioning scale. There were no significant differences between groups at any time point, suggesting that the dose escalation required for lamotrigine did not adversely affect its onset of action. Secondary outcome measures, including the use of lorazepam as rescue medication, did not differ between the groups. No significant adverse events were noted in either group. Conclusion: In this pilot study, lamotrigine was as effective as lithium in the treatment of patients with bipolar disorder hospitalised for acute mania.