Sedentary Behavior and Physical Activity in Individuals With Bipolar Disorder: An Evidence Synthesis and Position Statement From the ISBD Nutrition and Exercise Task Force (NExT)
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.
Functional Outcomes in Bipolar Disorder: Cross-Cohort Analyses from the Global Bipolar Cohort
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.
Defining Treatment‐Resistant Bipolar Depression: Recommendations From the
ISBD
Task Force
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.