Gardea-Resendez, Manuel

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 Objectives To explore the clinical impact of social determinants of health (SDoH) stress in bipolar disorder (BD) course of illness and to explore potential gender differences in SDoH stress endorsement. Methods 2280 individuals living with BD type I or II (62% women; 67.5% BD‐I) participating in the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank who completed a questionnaire assessing positive and negative‐valent stressors in the 12 months prior to study enrollment were included for this analysis. Six negative stressors were used as proxies of SDoH. Generalized linear models were used to test the association between SDoH stressors and markers of illness severity as well as potential differences by sex by including an interaction term. Results After adjusting for age, sex, and recruitment site, SDoH‐related stressors were significantly associated with a more severe course of illness in both men and women. Except for unemployment rates, women reported more frequently SDoH‐related stress (i.e., lack of family support, financial problems, health coverage and access problems). Conclusions The study found significant gender differences in both the endorsement of specific SDoH stressors and in the prevalence of specific illness severity markers; however, it did not directly test the predictive relationship between gender differences in SDoH and illness severity markers. Future studies aiming to achieve health equity in mental health care should continue assessing social determinants of health stressors, incorporating a gender perspective to better understand their influence on bipolar disorder.

ABSTRACT Background Despite the classic Kraepelinian dichotomy between bipolar disorder (BD) and schizophrenia (SZ), contemporary evidence suggests shared antecedent risk factors and similarities in the early course. This study aimed to identify distinct trajectories leading to first‐episode mania (FEM) and first‐episode psychosis (FEP) by examining antecedent psychopathology, including psychiatric diagnoses, symptoms, substance use, and psychotropic medication exposure. Methods Individuals born after 1985 who resided in Olmsted County, Minnesota, USA, and had FEM/FEP were identified through the Rochester Epidemiology Project. Latent class analysis (LCA) was used to identify subgroups based on antecedent psychopathology incorporating 57 dichotomous antecedent measures before FEM/FEP. Results A total of 202 individuals ( BD n = 73, SZ n = 129; 26.7% female, mean age 20.8 ± 3.7 years) were included. A 3‐class LCA model optimally fits the data. Class 1 (Neurodevelopmental, 29.7%) had a high prevalence of neurodevelopmental disorders, behavioral symptoms, and ADHD medication use. Class 2 (Depressive‐Anxious, 31.2%) included depressive and anxiety disorders, mood‐related symptoms, and SSRI / SNRI use. Class 3 (Minimal Psychiatric Morbidity, 39.1%) had a low prevalence of antecedent diagnoses and symptoms, with comparable substance use to other classes. There were significant diagnostic differences, with SZ being more common in the Neurodevelopmental (71.7%) and Minimal Psychiatric Morbidity (70.9%) classes, while BD was more common in the Depressive‐Anxious class ( p = 0.007). Neurodevelopmental and Minimal Psychiatric Morbidity classes had higher proportions of males (85.0% and 82.3%, respectively) compared to the Depressive‐Anxious class (50.8%, p < 0.001). The Neurodevelopmental class showed an earlier age at first mental health visit (9.5 ± 5.5 years) and a longer antecedent illness duration (10.8 ± 6.1 years) than the other classes ( p < 0.001). Conclusion This study identified three distinct pathways to FEM and FEP, offering a transdiagnostic perspective on the antecedent illness trajectories of BD and SZ. Future research should validate these categories that are more inclusive than the classic BD versus SZ dichotomy and explore their potential for predicting illness course and guiding personalized early interventions.

ABSTRACTObjectiveTo build consensus from different stakeholders on the content and digital interactivity of a shared decision making (SDM) tool to guide patient‐clinician collaborative conversations about treatment for bipolar depression.Patients and MethodsThis study was conducted between September 2022 and September 2023. In the first phase, we conducted a narrative review on pharmacological, neuromodulatory, and psychotherapeutic treatments available for bipolar depression. For each option, we assessed treatment effectiveness, side effects, need for clinical monitoring, clinical considerations, and cost. In the second phase, committees comprised of mental health clinicians and people with lived experience with bipolar disorder from a national mood disorders advocacy group identified key features and content to be included in the SDM tool. A thematic analysis of these data then contributed to populate the SDM tool.ResultsTwenty‐one evidence‐based treatment options identified from the narrative review were presented to the four convened committees (clinical, lived experience, peer council, and integrated steering committees) in five meetings. After discussions and thematic analysis, 12 outcomes of interest for each of the therapeutic interventions were delineated for inclusion in a web‐based SDM tool. A detailed description of the development process and SDM tool is provided.ConclusionThis is the first partnership between clinicians and persons with bipolar disorder lived experience charged with the development of a patient‐centered SDM tool to integrate clinical evidence with real‐world clinical practice and patient preferences for use during clinical encounters. Human‐centered design and testing in real clinical encounters will now contribute to refining the instrument and readying it for rigorous evaluation and implementation in practice.

In this case series, we present several examples from participants (2 patients and 1 healthy control) of a 12-week pilot feasibility study to create a digital phenotype of depression (unipolar or bipolar) through active and passive data collection from a smartphone and a wearable device combined with routine clinical care for mood disorders. The selected cases represent real clinical examples that highlight the intrinsic challenges that should be expected when conducting similar studies, including appropriate health data privacy protection, clinical standardization, and interindividual differences in levels of engagement and acceptability of active and passive data collection (ie, self-reported, behavioral, cognitive, and physiological data), particularly with patient-generated data in mobile apps, digital proficiency habituation, and consistent use of wearable devices. In the context of the rapidly growing use of digital technologies in psychiatry, anticipating challenges for the integration of personal mobile devices and smartphone mental health apps as aides to track specific aspects of depressive disorders is critical for a clinically meaningful digital transformation of mood disorders care.

AbstractTo date, bipolar disorder (BD) genetic studies and polygenic risk scores (PRSs) for BD are based primarily on populations of European descent (EUR) and lack representation from other ancestries including Latin American (LAT). Here, we describe a new LAT cohort from the Mayo Clinic Bipolar Biobank (MCBB), a multisite collaboration with recruitment sites in the United States (EUR; 1,443 cases and 777 controls) and Mexico and Chile (LAT; 211 cases and 161 controls) and use the sample to explore the performance of a BD‐PRS in a LAT population. Using results from the largest genome‐wide association study of BD in EUR individuals, PRSice2 and LDpred2 were used to compute BD‐PRSs in the LAT and EUR samples from the MCBB. PRSs explained up to 1.4% (PRSice) and 4% (LDpred2) of the phenotypic variance on the liability scale in the LAT sample compared to 3.8% (PRSice2) and 3.4% (LDpred2) in the EUR samples. Future larger studies should further explore the differential performance of different PRS approaches across ancestries. International multisite studies, such as this one, have the potential to address diversity‐related limitations of prior genomic studies and ultimately contribute to the reduction of health disparities.

Abstract Purpose Recognizing the negative impact that antipsychotic-induced movement disorders have on the quality of life and treatment outcomes in bipolar disorder (BD), this study aimed to assess clinical correlates and antipsychotic use patterns of tardive dyskinesia (TD+) in BD. Materials and Methods Participants with and without TD were included. Clinical variables were compared using t-test and χ2 test. Antipsychotic use patterns in TD+, including number of trials, mean doses, and estimated cumulative exposure, were assessed in a case-only analysis. Results The prevalence rate of TD was 5.1%. In comparison to the TD− group (n = 1074), TD+ participants (n = 58) were older, more likely to be female and have type I bipolar illness. There were 60.3% of the TD+ group that continued using antipsychotics at study entry and had a mean cumulative exposure to antipsychotics of 18.2 ± 15.6 years. Average dose, in haloperidol equivalents, was 5.9 ± 3.5 mg and 77.7% of the trials were second-generation antipsychotics. Conclusions This study confirms previously identified TD risk factors, such as age, sex, and bipolar subtype in a large BD cohort. Limitations included a cross-sectional design and the lack of tardive illness severity assessment. As atypical antipsychotics continue to be primary mood stabilization treatment, attempting to harmonize large data sets to identify additional biomarkers of tardive risk will optimize individualized care for patients with BD.