Alda, Martin

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 Bipolar disorder’s (BD) clinical heterogeneity has an unresolved genetic basis. We meta-analyzed genome-wide association studies (GWAS) of 16 BD subphenotypes in 226,032 individuals from 57 cohorts (38,022 cases); 10 advanced to multivariate and multi-trait analyses. Four factors (compulsive, psychotic, dysregulated, internalizing) explained 82.8% of shared genetic variance. BD1 and BD2 loaded on distinct factors despite a high genetic correlation; 87.0% of common-factor loci were significant in neither subtype. Unipolar mania aligned with psychosis over internalizing, and was distinguishable from BD1, and rapid cycling showed heritable cross-domain liability. We identified 356 risk loci, 158 novel, including the first univariate-GWAS associations for psychosis, unipolar mania, rapid cycling and schizoaffective disorder—and 249 credible genes (89 high-confidence), 12 with approved-drug or clinical-phase annotations. Cell-type association showed a midbrain dopaminergic–GABAergic gradient along the psychotic factor. BD’s genetic architecture appears hierarchical—a general liability resolving into dimensions of course and comorbidity beyond diagnostic subtypes.

Abstract Lithium is the gold standard treatment for bipolar disorder (BD). However, its mechanism of action is incompletely understood, and prediction of treatment outcomes is limited. In our previous multi-omics study of the Pharmacogenomics of Bipolar Disorder (PGBD) sample combining transcriptomic and genomic data, we found that focal adhesion, the extracellular matrix (ECM), and PI3K-Akt signaling networks were associated with response to lithium. In this study, we replicated the results of our previous study using network propagation methods in a genome-wide association study of an independent sample of 2,039 patients from the International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) study. We identified functional enrichment in focal adhesion and PI3K-Akt pathways, but we did not find an association with the ECM pathway. Our results suggest that deficits in the neuronal growth cone and PI3K-Akt signaling, but not in ECM proteins, may influence response to lithium in BD.

Abstract The link between bipolar disorder (BP) and immune dysfunction remains controversial. While epidemiological studies have long suggested an association, recent research has found only limited evidence of such a relationship. To clarify this, we investigated the contributions of immune-relevant genetic factors to the response to lithium (Li) treatment and the clinical presentation of BP. First, we assessed the association of a large collection of immune-related genes (4,925) with Li response, defined by the Retrospective Assessment of the Lithium Response Phenotype Scale (Alda scale), and clinical characteristics in patients with BP from the International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLi+Gen, N = 2,374). Second, we calculated here previously published polygenic scores (PGSs) for immune-related traits and evaluated their associations with Li response and clinical features. We found several genes associated with Li response at p < 1x10− 4 values, including HAS3, CNTNAP5 and NFIB. Network and functional enrichment analyses uncovered an overrepresentation of pathways involved in cell adhesion and intercellular communication, which appear to converge on the well-known Li-induced inhibition of GSK-3β. We also found various genes associated with BP’s age-at-onset, number of mood episodes, and presence of psychosis, substance abuse and/or suicidal ideation at the exploratory threshold. These included RTN4, XKR4, NRXN1, NRG1/3 and GRK5. Additionally, PGS analyses suggested serum FAS, ECP, TRANCE and cytokine ligands, amongst others, might represent potential circulating biomarkers of Li response and clinical presentation. Taken together, our results support the notion of a relatively weak association between immunity and clinically relevant features of BP at the genetic level.

Abstract Lithium is regarded as the first-line treatment for bipolar disorder (BD), a severe and disabling mental disorder that affects about 1% of the population worldwide. Nevertheless, lithium is not consistently effective, with only 30% of patients showing a favorable response to treatment. To provide personalized treatment options for bipolar patients, it is essential to identify prediction biomarkers such as polygenic scores. In this study, we developed a polygenic score for lithium treatment response (Li+PGS) in patients with BD. To gain further insights into lithium's possible molecular mechanism of action, we performed a genome-wide gene-based analysis. Using polygenic score modeling, via methods incorporating Bayesian regression and continuous shrinkage priors, Li+PGS was developed in the International Consortium of Lithium Genetics cohort (ConLi+Gen: N=2,367) and replicated in the combined PsyCourse (N=89) and BipoLife (N=102) studies. The associations of Li+PGS and lithium treatment response — defined in a continuous ALDA scale and a categorical outcome (good response vs. poor response) were tested using regression models, each adjusted for the covariates: age, sex, and the first four genetic principal components. Statistical significance was determined at P<����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

AbstractBackgroundBipolar disorder (BD) is characterized by episodes of depression and mania and disrupted circadian rhythms. Lithium is an effective therapy for BD, but only 30%–40% of patients are fully responsive. Preclinical models show that lithium alters circadian rhythms. However, it is unknown if the circadian rhythm effects of lithium are essential to its therapeutic properties.MethodsIn secondary analyses of a multi‐center, prospective, trial of lithium for BD, we examined the relationship between circadian rhythms and therapeutic response to lithium. Using standardized instruments, we measured morningness, diurnal changes in mood, sleep, and energy (circadian rhythm disturbances) in a cross‐sectional study of 386 BD subjects with varying lithium exposure histories. Next, we tracked symptoms of depression and mania prospectively over 12 weeks in a subset of 88 BD patients initiating treatment with lithium. Total, circadian, and affective mood symptoms were scored separately and analyzed.ResultsSubjects with no prior lithium exposure had the most circadian disruption, while patients stable on lithium monotherapy had the least. Patients who were stable on lithium with another drug or unstable on lithium showed intermediate levels of disruption. Treatment with lithium for 12 weeks yielded significant reductions in total and affective depression symptoms. Lithium responders (Li‐Rs) showed improvement in circadian symptoms of depression, but non‐responders did not. There was no difference between Li‐Rs and nonresponders in affective, circadian, or total symptoms of mania.ConclusionsExposure to lithium is associated with reduced circadian disruption. Lithium response at 12 weeks was selectively associated with the reduction of circadian depressive symptoms. We conclude that stabilization of circadian rhythms may be an important feature of lithium's therapeutic effects. Clinical Trials Registry: NCT0127253.

AbstractBackgroundLithium is regarded as a first‐line treatment for bipolar disorder (BD), but partial response and non‐response commonly occurs. There exists a need to identify lithium non‐responders prior to initiating treatment. The Pharmacogenomics of Bipolar Disorder (PGBD) Study was designed to identify predictors of lithium response.MethodsThe PGBD Study was an eleven site prospective trial of lithium treatment in bipolar I disorder. Subjects were stabilized on lithium monotherapy over 4 months and gradually discontinued from all other psychotropic medications. After ensuring a sustained clinical remission (defined by a score of ≤3 on the CGI for 4 weeks) had been achieved, subjects were followed for up to 2 years to monitor clinical response. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the relationship between clinical measures and time until failure to remit or relapse.ResultsA total of 345 individuals were enrolled into the study and included in the analysis. Of these, 101 subjects failed to remit or relapsed, 88 achieved remission and continued to study completion, and 156 were terminated from the study for other reasons. Significant clinical predictors of treatment failure (p < 0.05) included baseline anxiety symptoms, functional impairments, negative life events and lifetime clinical features such as a history of migraine, suicidal ideation/attempts, and mixed episodes, as well as a chronic course of illness.ConclusionsIn this PGBD Study of lithium response, several clinical features were found to be associated with failure to respond to lithium. Future validation is needed to confirm these clinical predictors of treatment failure and their use clinically to distinguish who will do well on lithium before starting pharmacotherapy.

AbstractFirst‐degree relatives of patients diagnosed with schizophrenia (SZ‐FDRs) show similar patterns of brain abnormalities and cognitive alterations to patients, albeit with smaller effect sizes. First‐degree relatives of patients diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD‐FDRs) show divergent patterns; on average, intracranial volume is larger compared to controls, and findings on cognitive alterations in BD‐FDRs are inconsistent. Here, we performed a meta‐analysis of global and regional brain measures (cortical and subcortical), current IQ, and educational attainment in 5,795 individuals (1,103 SZ‐FDRs, 867 BD‐FDRs, 2,190 controls, 942 schizophrenia patients, 693 bipolar patients) from 36 schizophrenia and/or bipolar disorder family cohorts, with standardized methods. Compared to controls, SZ‐FDRs showed a pattern of widespread thinner cortex, while BD‐FDRs had widespread larger cortical surface area. IQ was lower in SZ‐FDRs (d = −0.42,p = 3 × 10−5), with weak evidence of IQ reductions among BD‐FDRs (d = −0.23,p = .045). Both relative groups had similar educational attainment compared to controls. When adjusting for IQ or educational attainment, the group‐effects on brain measures changed, albeit modestly. Changes were in the expected direction, with less pronounced brain abnormalities in SZ‐FDRs and more pronounced effects in BD‐FDRs. To conclude, SZ‐FDRs and BD‐FDRs show a differential pattern of structural brain abnormalities. In contrast, both had lower IQ scores and similar school achievements compared to controls. Given that brain differences between SZ‐FDRs and BD‐FDRs remain after adjusting for IQ or educational attainment, we suggest that differential brain developmental processes underlying predisposition for schizophrenia or bipolar disorder are likely independent of general cognitive impairment.

Objective: To derive new criteria sets for defining manic and hypomanic episodes (and thus for defining the bipolar I and II disorders), an international Task Force was assembled and termed AREDOC reflecting its role of Assessment, Revision and Evaluation of DSM and other Operational Criteria. This paper reports on the first phase of its deliberations and interim criteria recommendations. Method: The first stage of the process consisted of reviewing Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, and recent International Classification of Diseases criteria, identifying their limitations and generating modified criteria sets for further in-depth consideration. Task Force members responded to recommendations for modifying criteria and from these the most problematic issues were identified. Results: Principal issues focussed on by Task Force members were how best to differentiate mania and hypomania, how to judge ‘impairment’ (both in and of itself and allowing that functioning may sometimes improve during hypomanic episodes) and concern that rejecting some criteria (e.g. an imposed duration period) might risk false-positive diagnoses of the bipolar disorders. Conclusion: This first-stage report summarises the clinical opinions of international experts in the diagnosis and management of the bipolar disorders, allowing readers to contemplate diagnostic parameters that may influence their clinical decisions. The findings meaningfully inform subsequent Task Force stages (involving a further commentary stage followed by an empirical study) that are expected to generate improved symptom criteria for diagnosing the bipolar I and II disorders with greater precision and to clarify whether they differ dimensionally or categorically.

Objectives Bipolar disorder (BD) with early disease onset is associated with an unfavorable clinical outcome and constitutes a clinically and biologically homogenous subgroup within the heterogeneous BD spectrum. Previous studies have found an accumulation of early age at onset (AAO) in BD families and have therefore hypothesized that there is a larger genetic contribution to the early‐onset cases than to late onset BD. To investigate the genetic background of this subphenotype, we evaluated whether an increased polygenic burden of BD‐ and schizophrenia (SCZ)‐associated risk variants is associated with an earlier AAO in BD patients. Methods A total of 1995 BD type 1 patients from the Consortium of Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen), PsyCourse and Bonn‐Mannheim samples were genotyped and their BD and SCZ polygenic risk scores (PRSs) were calculated using the summary statistics of the Psychiatric Genomics Consortium as a training data set. AAO was either separated into onset groups of clinical interest (childhood and adolescence [≤18 years] vs adulthood [>18 years]) or considered as a continuous measure. The associations between BD‐ and SCZ‐PRSs and AAO were evaluated with regression models. Results BD‐ and SCZ‐PRSs were not significantly associated with age at disease onset. Results remained the same when analyses were stratified by site of recruitment. Conclusions The current study is the largest conducted so far to investigate the association between the cumulative BD and SCZ polygenic risk and AAO in BD patients. The reported negative results suggest that such a polygenic influence, if there is any, is not large, and highlight the importance of conducting further, larger scale studies to obtain more information on the genetic architecture of this clinically relevant phenotype.