Vieta, Eduard

Background: Bipolar disorder (BD) involves significant mood and energy shifts reflected in speech patterns. Detecting these patterns is crucial for diagnosis and monitoring, currently assessed subjectively. Advances in natural language processing offer opportunities to objectively analyze them. Aims: To (i) correlate speech features with manic-depressive symptom severity in BD, (ii) develop predictive models for diagnostic and treatment outcomes, and (iii) determine the most relevant speech features and tasks for these analyses. Methods: This naturalistic, observational study involved longitudinal audio recordings of BD patients at euthymia, during acute manic/depressive phases, and after-response. Patients participated in clinical evaluations, cognitive tasks, standard text readings, and storytelling. After automatic diarization and transcription, speech features, including acoustics, content, formal aspects, and emotionality, will be extracted. Statistical analyses will (i) correlate speech features with clinical scales, (ii) use lasso logistic regression to develop predictive models, and (iii) identify relevant speech features. Results: Audio recordings from 76 patients (24 manic, 21 depressed, 31 euthymic) were collected. The mean age was 46.0 ± 14.4 years, with 63.2% female. The mean YMRS score for manic patients was 22.9 ± 7.1, reducing to 5.3 ± 5.3 post-response. Depressed patients had a mean HDRS-17 score of 17.1 ± 4.4, decreasing to 3.3 ± 2.8 post-response. Euthymic patients had mean YMRS and HDRS-17 scores of 0.97 ± 1.4 and 3.9 ± 2.9, respectively. Following data pre-processing, including noise reduction and feature extraction, comprehensive statistical analyses will be conducted to explore correlations and develop predictive models. Conclusions: Automated speech analysis in BD could provide objective markers for psychopathological alterations, improving diagnosis, monitoring, and response prediction. This technology could identify subtle alterations, signaling early signs of relapse. Establishing standardized protocols is crucial for creating a global speech cohort, fostering collaboration, and advancing BD understanding.

Abstract Background: Lithium (Li) remains the treatment of choice for bipolar disorders (BP). Its mood-stabilizing effects help reduce the long-term burden of mania, depression and suicide risk in patients with BP. It also has been shown to have beneficial effects on disease-associated conditions, including sleep and cardiovascular disorders. However, the individual responses to Li treatment vary within and between diagnostic subtypes of BP (e.g. BP-I and BP-II) according to the clinical presentation. Moreover, long-term Li treatment has been linked to adverse side-effects that are a cause of concern and non-adherence, including the risk of developing chronic medical conditions such as thyroid and renal disease. In recent years, studies by the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) have uncovered a number of genetic factors that contribute to the variability in Li treatment response in patients with BP. Here, we leveraged the ConLiGen cohort (N=2,064) to investigate the genetic basis of Li effects in BP. For this, we studied how Li response and linked genes associate with the psychiatric symptoms and polygenic load for medical comorbidities, placing particular emphasis on identifying differences between BP-I and BP-II. Results: We found that clinical response to Li treatment, measured with the Alda scale, was associated with a diminished burden of mania, depression, substance and alcohol abuse, psychosis and suicidal ideation in patients with BP-I and, in patients with BP-II, of depression only. Our genetic analyses showed that a stronger clinical response to Li was modestly related to lower polygenic load for diabetes and hypertension in BP-I but not BP-II. Moreover, our results suggested that a number of genes that have been previously linked to Li response variability in BP differentially relate to the psychiatric symptomatology, particularly to the numbers of manic and depressive episodes, and to the polygenic load for comorbid conditions, including diabetes, hypertension and hypothyroidism. Conclusions: Taken together, our findings suggest that the effects of Li on symptomatology and comorbidity in BP are partially modulated by common genetic factors, with differential effects between BP-I and BP-II.

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 Objectives To understand treatment practices for bipolar disorders (BD), this study leveraged the Global Bipolar Cohort collaborative network to investigate pharmacotherapeutic treatment patterns in multiple cohorts of well‐characterized individuals with BD in North America, Europe, and Australia. Methods Data on pharmacotherapy, demographics, diagnostic subtypes, and comorbidities were provided from each participating cohort. Individual site and regional pooled proportional meta‐analyses with generalized linear mixed methods were conducted to identify prescription patterns. Results This study included 10,351 individuals from North America ( n = 3985), Europe ( n = 3822), and Australia ( n = 2544). Overall, participants were predominantly female (60%) with BD‐I (60%; vs. BD‐II = 33%). Cross‐sectionally, mood‐stabilizing anticonvulsants (44%), second‐generation antipsychotics (42%), and antidepressants (38%) were the most prescribed medications. Lithium was prescribed in 29% of patients, primarily in the Australian (31%) and European (36%) cohorts. First‐generation antipsychotics were prescribed in 24% of the European versus 1% in the North American cohort. Antidepressant prescription rates were higher in BD‐II (47%) compared to BD‐I (35%). Major limitations were significant differences among cohorts based on inclusion/exclusion criteria, data source, and time/year of enrollment into cohort. Conclusions Mood‐stabilizing anticonvulsants, second‐generation antipsychotics, and antidepressants were the most prescribed medications suggesting prescription patterns that are not necessarily guideline concordant. Significant differences exist in the prescription practices across different geographic regions, especially the underutilization of lithium in the North American cohorts and the higher utilization of first‐generation antipsychotics in the European cohorts. There is a need to conduct future longitudinal studies to further explore these differences and their impact on outcomes, and to inform and implement evidence‐based guidelines to help improve treatment practices 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<����������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������������

Bipolar disorder is heterogeneous in phenomenology, illness trajectory, and response to treatment. Despite evidence for the efficacy of multimodal­ity interventions, the majority of persons affected by this disorder do not achieve and sustain full syndromal recovery. It is eagerly anticipated that combining datasets across various information sources (e.g., hierarchical “multi‐omic” measures, electronic health records), analyzed using advanced computational methods (e.g., machine learning), will inform future diagnosis and treatment selection. In the interim, identifying clinically meaningful subgroups of persons with the disorder having differential response to specific treatments at point‐of‐care is an empirical priority. This paper endeavours to synthesize salient domains in the clinical characterization of the adult patient with bipolar disorder, with the overarching aim to improve health outcomes by informing patient management and treatment considerations. Extant data indicate that characterizing select domains in bipolar disorder provides actionable information and guides shared decision making. For example, it is robustly established that the presence of mixed features – especially during depressive episodes – and of physical and psychiatric comorbidities informs illness trajectory, response to treatment, and suicide risk. In addition, early environmental exposures (e.g., sexual and physical abuse, emotional neglect) are highly associated with more complicated illness presentations, inviting the need for developmentally‐oriented and integrated treatment approaches. There have been significant advances in validating subtypes of bipolar disorder (e.g., bipolar I vs. II disorder), particularly in regard to pharmacological interventions. As with other severe mental disorders, social functioning, interpersonal/family relationships and internalized stigma are domains highly relevant to relapse risk, health outcomes, and quality of life. The elevated standardized mortality ratio for completed suicide and suicidal behaviour in bipolar disorder invites the need for characterization of this domain in all patients. The framework of this paper is to describe all the above salient domains, providing a synthesis of extant literature and recommendations for decision support tools and clinical metrics that can be implemented at point‐of‐care.

Abstract Bipolar disorder (BD) is a complex and dynamic condition with a typical onset in late adolescence or early adulthood followed by an episodic course with intervening periods of subthreshold symptoms or euthymia. It is complicated by the accumulation of comorbid medical and psychiatric disorders. The etiology of BD remains unknown and no reliable biological markers have yet been identified. This is likely due to lack of comprehensive ontological framework and, most importantly, the fact that most studies have been based on small nonrepresentative clinical samples with cross‐sectional designs. We propose to establish large, global longitudinal cohorts of BD studied consistently in a multidimensional and multidisciplinary manner to determine etiology and help improve treatment. Herein we propose collection of a broad range of data that reflect the heterogenic phenotypic manifestations of BD that include dimensional and categorical measures of mood, neurocognitive, personality, behavior, sleep and circadian, life‐story, and outcomes domains. In combination with genetic and biological information such an approach promotes the integrating and harmonizing of data within and across current ontology systems while supporting a paradigm shift that will facilitate discovery and become the basis for novel hypotheses.

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.