Berk, Michael

ABSTRACT Objectives To investigate pharmacological treatment patterns in individuals with bipolar disorder (BD) with and without comorbid substance use disorder (SUD) and anxiety disorder (AX), we leveraged the Global Bipolar Cohort to analyze cross‐regional practices across North America, Europe, and the Pacific. Methods Fourteen cohorts contributed aggregate data on pharmacotherapy, demographics, diagnostic subtypes, and comorbidities. Proportional meta‐analyses using generalized linear mixed models were conducted to examine prescription trends and identify clinical differences. Results The sample ( N = 11,521) was 60% female and 84% Caucasian. Participants were categorized into four mutually exclusive groups based on comorbidity status: those with comorbid AX only, comorbid SUD only, both AX and SUD, or neither. The AX+SUD subgroup showed higher rates of attention‐deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post‐traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), rapid cycling, obesity, and unemployment, reflecting a more severe clinical profile. Regional variations were notable: North American cohorts reported higher prevalence of AX and SUD than European and Pacific cohorts. Antidepressants use for AX were more common in Europe and the Pacific, while North American prescribing patterns were more variable. Benzodiazepine use was high among individuals with SUD across all regions. Lithium and first‐generation antipsychotic prescriptions varied, with higher rates observed in Europe. Conclusions Findings underscore the heterogeneity of BD and the influence of comorbid AX and SUD on illness burden and treatment. Regional prescribing variations underscore the need for context‐specific guidelines. Gaps in data on medication‐assisted treatment for SUD point to areas for future research. These insights can support more individualized and effective care for complex BD presentations.

Abstract Objectives To systematically evaluate the certainty of evidence for treatment strategies across age groups and mood phases in bipolar disorder, and develop an open access web platform to facilitate shared decision making. Design Living umbrella review, evaluation, analysis, and communication hub (U-REACH) project. Data sources PubMed, PsycInfo, and Cochrane library databases, from inception to 19 November 2024. Eligibility criteria for selecting studies Systematic reviews with network or pairwise meta-analyses of randomised controlled trials of pharmacological, nutraceutical, psychosocial, brain stimulation, or circadian rhythm based treatments, administered as monotherapy (without concurrent interventions), augmentation treatment (interventions added to an ongoing treatment regimen), or combination treatment (simultaneous initiation of two different interventions), examining any age group, bipolar disorder phase (ie, acute bipolar depression, mania or mixed episodes, or maintenance), treatment, control, or outcome. Results 77 studies met the inclusion criteria (21 network meta-analyses and 56 pairwise meta-analyses), including 116 unique pharmacological (n=74), brain stimulation (n=18), nutraceutical (n=13), psychosocial (n=8), and circadian rhythm based (n=3) treatments as monotherapy, augmentation, or combination therapy, along with five control interventions. These studies covered 133 unique outcomes (45 efficacy outcomes and 88 safety outcomes) resulting in 2510 meta-analyses with Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) ratings of the certainty of the evidence as high (n=236), moderate (n=827), low (n=986), and very low (n=461). A communication hub, the Evidence Based Interventions for Bipolar Disorder (EBI-BD) platform, was developed and the full results are freely available ( https://ebibd-database.org ), including the preference based tool (12 interventions and 17 safety outcomes). Interventions effective across outcomes varied by phases. For bipolar depression, effective interventions in adults were cariprazine, divalproex or valproate, fluoxetine, ketamine (augmentation), lamotrigine, lumateperone, lurasidone, olanzapine, olanzapine with fluoxetine, and quetiapine, whereas effective interventions in children and adolescents were lurasidone and olanzapine with fluoxetine. For mania episodes, effective interventions in adults were aripiprazole, asenapine, carbamazepine, cariprazine, divalproex or valproate, haloperidol, lithium, olanzapine, paliperidone, quetiapine (also augmentation), risperidone (also as augmentation), tamoxifen, and ziprasidone, whereas effective interventions in children and adolescents were aripiprazole, asenapine, olanzapine, quetiapine, and risperidone. For maintenance, interventions effective across outcomes in adults were aripiprazole (also the long acting injectable formulation), asenapine, divalproex or valproate, lithium, olanzapine, group psychoeducation (augmentation), quetiapine, and risperidone long acting injectable formulation. Interventions effective across phases were aripiprazole (also as augmentation and as a long acting injectable formulation), asenapine, cariprazine, cognitive behavioural therapy (augmentation), divalproex or valproate, lamotrigine, lithium, olanzapine (also as augmentation), paliperidone, quetiapine (also as augmentation), and risperidone (also as augmentation and the long acting injectable formulation) (adults). Treatment effects by neuroscience based nomenclature classes are also reported. Conclusions The EBI-BD tool can help clinicians make evidence based, personalised treatment decisions for bipolar disorder. This resource can inform clinical guidelines and provides a foundation for continuously improving bipolar disorder care as new evidence emerges. Trial registration Open Science Framework https://osf.io/pjmvn/ Readers’ note This is a living systematic review and may be updated in the next two years if additional evidence emerges.

ABSTRACT Background Higher time in sedentary behavior and insufficient physical activity are very common in bipolar disorder (BD). Whereas physical activity and exercise offer significant benefits across mental health, brain health, and heart health in BD. The International Society for Bipolar Disorders Nutrition and Exercise Task Force (NExT) synthesized evidence to evaluate the impacts of sedentary behavior, physical activity, and exercise on illness course, physical health, and treatment outcomes. Methods A best‐evidence synthesis was conducted using a question‐and‐answer format. We searched PsycINFO, SPORTDiscus, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science from inception to March 1st, 2026, supplemented by reference lists and existing guidelines. Search terms included combinations of physical activity, exercise, sedentary behavior, and bipolar disorder‐related terms. Results Observational studies show that individuals with BD exhibit significantly higher sedentary behavior and lower physical activity compared to the general population, with notable discrepancies between self‐reported and objective measurements. Evidence on physical activity's protective role against BD onset is mixed, with some prospective and Mendelian randomization studies suggesting reduced risk, while others report bidirectional or null associations. Preliminary findings from clinical trials indicate that exercise improves overall functioning, reduces mood episode frequency and hospitalizations, and alleviates depressive symptoms, with one pilot study showing an 82% antidepressant response rate. Exercise also shows potential to reduce anxiety and improve sleep, though robust data are limited. Conclusions Despite limited high‐quality evidence, physical activity and exercise demonstrate promising physical and mental health benefits for individuals with BD. Future research should prioritize multicenter randomized controlled trials, enhanced assessment tools, and accessible, tailored programs to integrate physical activity into routine BD management.

Abstract Background The Global Bipolar Cohort (GBC) was established to identify existing bipolar disorder (BD) cohorts worldwide and foster collaborations focused on descriptive and analytic outcomes relevant to BD. A distributed analytic framework has been implemented to engage multiple sites without the need for central data pooling. This report describes the GBC endeavor and global functional impairment patterns. Cross-cohort comparisons of functional correlates are limited by heterogeneous measures and data-sharing constraints. Large, culturally diverse comparisons are needed to distinguish broadly reproducible correlates from cohort-specific effects. Participating sites completed a 28-item descriptive survey covering diagnostic methods, cognition, genetics, treatment, functioning, and follow-up strategies. We implemented a harmonized local logistic regression model of dichotomized functional outcome and shared summary statistics only. Results We identified 69 cohorts across five continents. Thirty-seven cohorts contributed functional outcome analyses from 17,130 participants. Outcome measures included clinician-rated disability scales and social indicators such as employment and marital status. The proportion classified with poor functioning ranged from 16% to 77% (mean 50%). In 32 of 37 cohorts, the overall regression model significantly explained variance in functioning. Current depressive symptoms were the most robust and reproducible correlate of poor functional outcome: they were assessed in 29 cohorts, significant in 22 (75.8%), ranked among the top three correlates in 22, and were the top-ranked correlates in 19. Associations between depressive burden and poor functioning were observed across clinician-rated disability scales and work or social indicators, and across geographically diverse cohorts. Comorbid substance use disorder and medication-related variables were associated with poorer functioning in subsets of cohorts, whereas sex, ancestry, bipolar subtype, psychosis history, and premorbid IQ showed weak or inconsistent associations. Cognitive measures, available in a minority of regression models, showed modest and non-uniform effects. Conclusions Across heterogeneous international cohorts, current depressive symptom burden emerged as the most consistent correlate of poor functioning in bipolar disorder. These findings replicate earlier multisite work at a larger scale, show that protocol-based distributed analyses can identify reproducible clinical signals without sharing individual-level data, and support prioritizing detection and treatment of depressive symptoms when aiming to improve real-world functioning. Future work should expand longitudinal harmonization and representation of under-studied populations.

Background Psychiatric disorders are increasingly contributing to global disability. Despite advances in conservative management, the prevalence of treatment-resistant cases remains high. Meanwhile, neurosurgery for psychiatric disorders (NPD) remains underused, largely due to strict regulations and historical concerns, particularly those related to neuropsychological side effects (NPSE). Objective To address this issue, we conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis to compare NPSE associated with radiofrequency ablative NPD to those observed in neuro-oncological, neurovascular and epilepsy surgeries. Methods PubMed, Embase and LILACS databases were searched in April 2024 for articles published in English/Spanish from 1990 to 2022, following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. Results A total of 48 articles with 2678 participants were included. The frequency of transient and permanent NPSE in the NPD group ranged from 0.94% to 11.50% and 0.94% to 2.03%, respectively, comparable to the other surgical groups (epilepsy: 0.31–11.70%; vascular: 0.52–22.90%; oncology: 0.94–17.60% for transient NPSE; epilepsy: 0.31–12%; vascular: 0.40–1.96% and oncology: 0.84–1.48% for permanent NPSE). Regarding permanent NPSE, arguably the most critical consideration, the NPD group showed better outcomes in memory, language and social cognition than the epilepsy group, but worse outcomes in executive and perceptual-motor functions. Compared with the vascular group, the NPD group had better executive function but worse complex attention. Finally, the NPD group had fewer permanent deficits than the oncology group in executive function, complex attention and perceptual-motor domains, although language performance was lower. Conclusions Contemporary NPD apparently carries a similar risk of NPSE as other conventional neurosurgical procedures, challenging misconceptions and this unjustified barrier to its broader use.

Summary The American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology convened a 45-member international expert task force to identify circumstances supporting the deprescribing of core psychotropic medications for major depressive disorder (MDD) and bipolar disorders. Three Delphi survey rounds plus a selective literature review identified points of consensus (predefined as ≥75% agreement) about when antidepressant, antipsychotic, mood stabiliser and sedative-hypnotic deprescribing is warranted. Twenty out of 32 statements (63%) achieved consensus across seven thematic areas. In MDD, panellists favoured discontinuing antidepressants when mechanisms of action are duplicative, adequate trials produce ≤25% improvement or loss of prior efficacy cannot be regained through dose increases or augmentations. Indefinite antidepressant maintenance in MDD was favoured after three or more lifetime episodes. In bipolar disorder, antidepressant deprescribing was favoured in the setting of rapid cycling, mixed features or emerging mania/hypomania symptoms; and discouraged if prior antidepressant cessation led to relapse. In nonpsychotic mood disorders, panellists favoured deprescribing antipsychotics that caused significant weight gain or tardive dyskinesia over adding pharmacological antidotes. Deprescribing to achieve an eventual medication-free status was considered inappropriate, in bipolar type 1, but not necessarily bipolar type 2 disorder. Although individualised circumstances necessarily inform psychopharmacology management, clinical presentations that misalign with existing pharmacotherapies may signal the desirability of cautious deprescribing.

ABSTRACT Background Sunlight has profound impacts on physical and mental health, beyond vision, including effects on circadian rhythms, alertness, mood, and sleep. A family history of any mood disorders is strongly associated with psychiatric disorders including bipolar disorder. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the association between a family history of any mood disorder in patients with bipolar I disorder and solar insolation at varied international onset locations. Methods Data for this analysis were available from 5842 patients with a diagnosis of bipolar I disorder obtained at 83 collection sites in both hemispheres. This included 4752 patients from 71 collection sites in the northern hemisphere and 1090 patients from 12 collection sites in the southern hemisphere. Patient data variables were obtained from records or interviews. Solar insolation data were obtained from The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) Power database for each onset location, and the ratio of the mean monthly minimum/mean monthly maximum solar insolation was calculated. Typically, the ratio is largest near the equator (little yearly change in solar insolation) and smallest near the poles (large yearly change in solar insolation). Results A significant relationship was found between a family history of any mood disorder, the ratio of the mean monthly minimum/mean monthly maximum solar insolation, and gender. The odds of a family history of mood disorder increased as patient location nears the poles and decreased near the equator. Female gender also increased the odds of having a family history of a mood disorder. Conclusions This study highlighted the association between family history, solar insolation, and gender in international patients with bipolar I disorder. Given the profound effects of sunlight on human health, the family of patients with bipolar disorder who live in the same location with the same solar insolation, and especially females, may be at increased risk for a mood disorder.

Importance There is a need for greater recognition of clinical psychopharmacology endpoints, including instances where specific psychotropic medications may become unnecessary, redundant, contradictory, or otherwise inappropriate and therefore merit deprescribing. Objective To address circumstances warranting psychotropic medication deprescribing. Evidence Review The American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology convened a panel of 45 international psychopharmacology experts who developed and completed a multiround Delphi survey and conducted a focused literature review between January and May of 2025, in order to identify areas of consensus or disagreement on key aspects of the deprescribing of psychotropic medications. These included collaborative risk-benefit assessments with patients; pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors; pharmacogenomics; distinguishing redundant or conflictual from complementary mechanisms of action; managing adverse effects; assuring medication adherence; drug tolerance or tachyphylaxis; medication misuse; and the psychological context and ramifications of deprescribing. Findings Consensus was achieved on 44 of 50 final Delphi statements (88%). Panelists unanimously agreed that components of a pharmacotherapy regimen should undergo periodic review to ensure that treatments target relevant symptoms and have favorable risk-benefit ratios. Key points of consensus were that deprescribing: (1) should not occur without first assessing medication adherence; (2) merits consideration if less than partial therapeutic response is apparent, or if treatment goals have been reached and relapse prevention is not a long-term objective; (3) involves psychological ramifications that warrant attention; (4) should be followed by close clinical monitoring; and (5) risk-benefit decisions should ideally involve active patient participation within a shared decision-making model. Conclusions and Relevance Through this Consensus Statement, the Task Force identified circumstances in which the selective elimination of certain psychotropic medications may be clinically indicated. Empirical trials are needed to assess the implementation of deprescribing protocols and gauge their safe, effective, and acceptable outcomes.

ABSTRACT Objective Despite the availability of approved treatments, a substantial proportion of patients with bipolar disorder experience treatment‐resistant bipolar depression (TRBD), characterized by persistent depressive symptoms unresponsive to standard therapies. However, a universally accepted definition of TRBD is lacking. This consensus document, developed by the International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) Task Force on TRBD, aims to provide a standardized definition of TRBD to facilitate clinical trials, research, and treatment strategies. Methods The Task Force employed a literature review, clinical trials analysis, and expert consensus meetings to define TRBD. Results TRBD was defined as the failure to achieve a significant and sustained clinical response after at least two approved and adequately dosed pharmacological treatments, administered for a sufficient duration with treatment adherence. For bipolar I (BD‐I) depression, approved treatments included quetiapine (300–600 mg/day for ≥ 8 weeks), lurasidone (20–120 mg/day for ≥ 6 weeks), the combination of olanzapine (6–12 mg/day) and fluoxetine (25–75 mg/day for ≥ 8 weeks), cariprazine (1.5–3 mg/day for ≥ 6 weeks), and lumateperone (42 mg/day for ≥ 6 weeks). For bipolar II (BD‐II) depression, approved treatments included quetiapine (300–600 mg/day for ≥ 8 weeks) and lumateperone (42 mg/day for ≥ 6 weeks). Conclusion This consensus definition aims to provide clarity for clinical trials, improve consistency in research, and guide treatment approaches and inform regulatory pathways. It represents a foundational step in addressing the unmet needs in TRBD and promoting the development of innovative therapeutic strategies. Future efforts will focus on adapting the definition to better align with real‐world clinical challenges and optimize patient care.

Abstract Background Treatment of refractory bipolar disorder (BD) is extremely challenging. Deep brain stimulation (DBS) holds promise as an effective treatment intervention. However, we still understand very little about the mechanisms of DBS and its application on BD. Aim The present study aimed to investigate the behavioural and neurochemical effects of ventral tegmental area (VTA) DBS in an animal model of mania induced by methamphetamine (m‐amph). Methods Wistar rats were given 14 days of m‐amph injections, and on the last day, animals were submitted to 20 min of VTA DBS in two different patterns: intermittent low‐frequency stimulation (LFS) or continuous high‐frequency stimulation (HFS). Immediately after DBS, manic‐like behaviour and nucleus accumbens (NAc) phasic dopamine (DA) release were evaluated in different groups of animals through open‐field tests and fast‐scan cyclic voltammetry. Levels of NAc dopaminergic markers were evaluated by immunohistochemistry. Results M‐amph induced hyperlocomotion in the animals and both DBS parameters reversed this alteration. M‐amph increased DA reuptake time post‐sham compared to baseline levels, and both LFS and HFS were able to block this alteration. LFS was also able to reduce phasic DA release when compared to baseline. LFS was able to increase dopamine transporter (DAT) expression in the NAc. Conclusion These results demonstrate that both VTA LFS and HFS DBS exert anti‐manic effects and modulation of DA dynamics in the NAc. More specifically the increase in DA reuptake driven by increased DAT expression may serve as a potential mechanism by which VTA DBS exerts its anti‐manic effects.