Dataset Information

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

ABSTRACT:

Aim

Pharmacological treatments recommended for bipolar depression are inconsistent across guidelines. We compared the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression.

Methods

A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression was conducted based on a literature search of major electronic databases.

Results

Three studies comparing quetiapine with lithium were identified and analyzed; no other antipsychotic-mood stabilizer combinations were found. The meta-analysis revealed no significant differences between quetiapine and lithium for the following outcomes: (1) remission from depressive episodes (risk ratio [RR]: 1.80, 95% CI: 0.51-6.40, P = 0.36), (2) changes in depressive symptom (standardized mean difference: -0.22, 95% CI: -0.52-0.08, P = 0.15), (3) changes in social function (standardized mean difference: -0.00, 95% CI: -0.19-0.18, P = 0.98), (4) suicide-related events (odds ratio [OR]: 2.35, 95% CI: 0.40-13.65, P = 0.34), (5) severe adverse events (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 0.51-5.20, P = 0.41), (6) dropouts due to adverse events (RR: 1.19, 95% CI: 0.76-1.87, P = 0.45, 7) dropout for any reasons (RR: 0.95, 95% CI: 0.74-1.22, P = 0.70).

Conclusion

Although this study found no differences in the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression, a comprehensive comparison of antipsychotics and mood stabilizers was not performed. Further studies are needed to clarify which of these, not just quetiapine and lithium, is more useful for bipolar depression.

SUBMITTER: Ogasawara M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9773747 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Ogasawara Masaya M Takeshima Masahiro M Esaki Yuichi Y Kaneko Yoshiyuki Y Utsumi Tomohiro T Aoki Yumi Y Watanabe Norio N Suzuki Masahiro M Takaesu Yoshikazu Y

Neuropsychopharmacology reports 20220720 4

<h4>Aim</h4>Pharmacological treatments recommended for bipolar depression are inconsistent across guidelines. We compared the efficacy and safety of antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression.<h4>Methods</h4>A systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing antipsychotics and mood stabilizers for bipolar depression was conducted based on a literature search of major electronic databases.<h4>Results</h4>Three studies comparing quetiapine with lithium we ...[more]

PMID: 35858678

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveQuetiapine is an atypical antipsychotic with demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of adolescent schizophrenia and pediatric bipolar mania. Large, placebo-controlled studies of interventions in pediatric bipolar depression are lacking. The current study investigated the efficacy and safety of quetiapine extended-release (XR) in patients 10-17 years of age, with acute bipolar depression.MethodsThis multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study investigated quetiapine XR (dose range, 150-300 mg/day) in pediatric outpatients with an American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed., Text Revision (DSM-IV-TR) diagnosis of bipolar I or bipolar II disorder (current or most recent episode depressed) treated for up to 8 weeks (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00811473). The primary study outcome was mean change in Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) total score. Secondary efficacy outcomes included CDRS-R-based response and remission rates.ResultsOf 193 patients randomized to treatment, 144 patients completed the study (75.3% of quetiapine XR group [n=70]; 74.0% of placebo group [n=74]). Least squares mean changes in CDRS-R total score at week 8 were: -29.6 (SE, 1.65) with quetiapine XR and -27.3 (SE, 1.60) with placebo, a between-treatment group difference of -2.29 (SE, 1.99; 95% CI, -6.22, 1.65; p=0.25; mixed-model for repeated measures analysis). Rates of response and remission did not differ significantly between treatment groups. The safety profile of quetiapine XR was broadly consistent with the profile reported previously in adult studies of quetiapine XR and pediatric studies of quetiapine immediate-release (IR). Potentially clinically significant elevations in clinical chemistry values included triglycerides (9.3%, quetiapine XR; 1.4%, placebo group) and thyroid stimulating hormone (4.7%, quetiapine XR; 0%, placebo group). An adverse event potentially related to diabetes mellitus occurred in 3.3% of the quetiapine XR versus no adverse events in the placebo group.ConclusionsQuetiapine XR did not demonstrate efficacy relative to placebo in this 8 week study of pediatric bipolar depression. Quetiapine XR was generally safe and well tolerated.

Project description:Objective: To compare the efficacy and tolerability of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of manic or mixed episodes in youths with early course bipolar I disorder. Methods: Six-week, randomized, double-blind clinical trial of lithium versus quetiapine for the treatment of adolescents with acute manic/mixed episode. Target dose of quetiapine dose was adjusted to a target dose of 400-600 mg and target serum level for lithium was 1.0-1.2 mEq/L. Primary outcome measure was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). Secondary outcomes were treatment response (50% or more decrease from baseline in YMRS score) and remission (YMRS score ≤12, Children's Depression Rating Scale-Revised [CDRS-R] total score ≤28 and Clinical Global Impression Bipolar Severity Scale [CGI-BP-S] overall score of ≤3, respectively). Results: A total of 109 patients were randomized (quetiapine = 58 and lithium = 51). Participants in the quetiapine treatment group showed a significantly greater reduction in YMRS score than those in the lithium group (-11.0 vs. -13.2; p < 0.001; effect size 0.39). Response rate was 72% in the quetiapine group and 49% in the lithium group (p = 0.012); no differences in remission rates between groups were observed. Most frequent side effects for lithium were headaches (60.8%), nausea (39.2%), somnolence (27.5%), and tremor (27.5%); for quetiapine somnolence (63.8%), headaches (55.2%), tremor (36.2%), and dizziness (36.2%) were evidenced. Participants receiving quetiapine experienced more somnolence (p < 0.001), dizziness (p < 0.05), and weight gain (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Treatment with both lithium and quetiapine led to clinical improvement. Most study participants in this study experienced a clinical response; however, less than half of the participants in this study achieved symptomatic remission. The head-to-head comparison of both treatment groups showed quetiapine was associated with a statistically significant greater rate of response and overall symptom reduction compared with lithium. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov NCT00893581.

Project description:The efficacy and safety of olanzapine monotherapy are evaluated in Japanese patients from a large, global study of bipolar depression.This is an analysis of Japanese patients from a 6-week, global (Japan, China, Korea, Taiwan, and the United States), randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 study of patients with a depressive episode of bipolar I disorder. The primary outcome was baseline-to-endpoint change in the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) total score. Secondary outcome measures included the Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Version Severity of Illness Scale (CGI-BP), the 17-item Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HAMD-17) total score, the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) total score, and rates of response (?50% baseline-to-endpoint reduction in MADRS total score), recovery, and remission.Of the 156 Japanese patients, 104 had been allocated to olanzapine and 52 to placebo. All results are baseline-to-endpoint change. Compared to placebo, patients in the olanzapine group experienced greater improvement in the primary outcome measure, MADRS total score (-14.9 vs. -10.7; p?=?.01). They also had greater reductions in the following secondary measures: CGI- BP Depression (-1.41 vs. -0.89; p?=?.008), CGI-BP Bipolar (-1.31 vs. -0.83; p?=?.01), HAMD-17 (-11.7 vs. -7.9; p?<?.01), and YMRS (-0.32 vs. 0.34; p?=?.03). Differences in rates of response, recovery, and remission were not statistically significant. A greater proportion of olanzapine-treated patients reported treatment- emergent adverse events (87.5% vs. 59.6%; p?<?.001). Patients treated with olanzapine had greater increases in weight (p?<?.001) and fasting total cholesterol (p?=?.008); fasting triglycerides (p?=?.02), and fasting low-density lipoprotein (p?=?.01). There was a greater reduction in fasting high-density lipoprotein in olanzapine-treated patients (p?=?.01). Compared with placebo-group patients, more olanzapine-group patients shifted from borderline to high cholesterol (25.0% vs. 0.0%; p?=?.007) and had clinically significant weight gain (?7% body weight) (20.2% vs. 1.9%; p?=?.001).Results of this analysis support the efficacy and tolerability of olanzapine for the treatment of bipolar depression in Japanese patients. Results in this population were consistent with those seen in the more ethnically diverse parent study. In making treatment decisions for individual patients, clinicians should carefully consider the risks and benefits of olanzapine treatment.Clinicatrials.gov ID NCT00510146 Olanzapine Treatment of Patients with Bipolar I Disorder.

Dataset Information

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Aim

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

Comparison of the efficacy and safety of quetiapine and lithium for bipolar depression: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets