Núñez, Nicolás A.

Objective Our aim was to evaluate the relationship between evening chronotype, a proxy marker of circadian system dysfunction, and disordered eating behavior and poor dietary habits in individuals with bipolar disorder (BD). Methods In this cross‐sectional study, we evaluated 783 adults with BD. Chronotype was determined using item 5 from the reduced Morningness‐Eveningness Questionnaire. The Eating Disorder Diagnostic Scale (EDDS) and the Rapid Eating Assessment for Participants—Shortened Version (REAP‐S) were used to assess disordered eating behavior and dietary habits respectively. General linear models and logistic regression models were utilized to evaluate differences between chronotype groups. Results Two hundred and eight (27%) BD participants self‐identified as having evening chronotypes. Compared to non‐evening types, evening types were younger ( P < 0.01) and, after controlling for age, had higher mean EDDS composite z‐scores ( P < 0.01); higher rates of binge‐eating (BE) behavior ( P = 0.04), bulimia nervosa ( P < 0.01), and nocturnal eating binges ( P < 0.01); and a higher body mass index ( P = 0.04). Compared to non‐evening types, evening chronotypes had a lower REAP‐S overall score ( P < 0.01) and scored lower on the ‘healthy foods’ and ‘avoidance of unhealthy food’ factors. Evening types also skipped breakfast more often ( P < 0.01), ate less fruit ( P = 0.02) and vegetables ( P = 0.04), and consumed more fried foods ( P < 0.01), unhealthy snacks ( P = 0.02), and soft drinks ( P = 0.01). Conclusions Our findings suggest that the circadian system plays a role in the disordered eating and unhealthy dietary behaviors observed in BD patients. The circadian system may therefore represent a therapeutic target in BD‐associated morbidity that warrants further investigation.

Background: Psychotic symptoms are common in Alzheimer’s disease (AD) and related neurodegenerative disorders and are associated with more rapid disease progression and increased mortality. It is unclear to what degree existing criteria are utilized in clinical research and practice. Objective: To establish research criteria for the diagnosis of psychosis in AD. Methods: The International Society to Advance Alzheimer’s Research and Treatment (ISTAART) Neuropsychiatric Symptoms (NPS) Professional Interest Area (PIA) psychosis subgroup reviewed existing criteria for psychosis in AD and related dementias. Through a series of in person and on-line meetings, a priority checklist was devised to capture features necessary for current research and clinical needs. PubMed, Medline and other relevant databases were searched for relevant criteria. Results: Consensus identified three sets of criteria suitable for review including those of Jeste and Finkel, Lyketsos, and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual for Mental Disorders, 5th edition. It was concluded that existing criteria could be augmented by including a more specific differentiation between delusions and hallucinations, address overlap with related conditions (agitation in particular), adding the possibility of symptoms emerging in the preclinical and prodromal phases, and building on developing research in disease biomarkers. Conclusion: We propose criteria, developed to improve phenotypic classification of psychosis in AD, and advance the research agenda in the field to improve epidemiological, biomarker, and genetics research in the field. These criteria serve as a complement to the International Psychogeriatric Association criteria for psychosis in neurocognitive disorders.

Abstract Objective The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the dopaminergic‐enhancing agent modafinil/armodafinil (MoArm) as adjunctive treatment for bipolar depression. Methods A comprehensive search of major electronic databases was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of adjunctive MoArm that included patients with bipolar I (BP‐I) or bipolar II (BP‐II) depression. Data for response/remission and all‐cause discontinuation were analyzed. Effect size was summarized by relative risk (RR) using a random effect model. Results Of 58 studies, five RCTs (N = 795 drug, N = 792 placebo) met inclusion criteria. Four armodafinil studies included only BP‐I patients and one modafinil study included both bipolar subtypes with limited heterogeneity ( I 2 = 34%, P = .19; I 2 = 18%, P = .30). Compared to placebo, augmentation with MoArm was associated with significantly greater rates of treatment response (RR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.01‐1.37; P = .03) and remission (RR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.10‐1.73; P = .005). All‐cause discontinuation was not different than placebo (RR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.89‐1.30; P = .45) with no evidence of increased risk of mood switch or suicide attempts with MoArm (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.39‐2.5; P = .98; RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.37‐2.85; P = .97). Conclusion This narrower scope meta‐analysis of one drug for one disease suggests that adjunctive MoArm may represent a novel therapeutic intervention. Further studies delineating the subtypes of bipolar depression responsive to these novel dopaminergic‐enhancing agents are encouraged.