Treatment implications of predominant polarity and the polarity index: a comprehensive review.

dc.contributor.authorCarvalho, André F.
dc.contributor.authorQuevedo, Joao
dc.contributor.authorMcIntyre, Roger S.
dc.contributor.authorSoeiro-de-Souza, Márcio G.
dc.contributor.authorFountoulakis, Konstantinos N.
dc.contributor.authorBerk, Michael
dc.contributor.authorHyphantis, Thomas N.
dc.contributor.authorVieta i Pascual, Eduard, 1963-
dc.date.accessioned2016-11-25T16:10:59Z
dc.date.available2016-12-31T23:01:30Z
dc.date.issued2014-10-31
dc.date.updated2016-11-25T16:11:04Z
dc.description.abstractBackground: Bipolar disorder (BD) is a serious and recurring condition that affects approximately 2.4% of the global population. About half of BD sufferers have an illness course characterized by either a manic or a depressive predominance. This predominant polarity in BD may be differentially associated with several clinical correlates. The concept of a polarity index (PI) has been recently proposed as an index of the antimanic versus antidepressive efficacy of various maintenance treatments for BD. Notwithstanding its potential clinical utility, predominant polarity was not included in the DSM-5 as a BD course specifier. Methods: Here we searched computerized databases for original clinical studies on the role of predominant polarity for selection of and response to pharmacological treatments for BD. Furthermore, we systematically searched the Pubmed database for maintenance randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for BD to determine the PI of the various pharmacological agents for BD. Results: We found support from naturalistic studies that bipolar patients with a predominantly depressive polarity are more likely to be treated with an antidepressive stabilization package, while BD patients with a manic-predominant polarity are more frequently treated with an antimanic stabilization package. Furthermore, predominantly manic BD patients received therapeutic regimens with a higher mean PI. The calculated PI varied from 0.4 (for lamotrigine) to 12.1 (for aripiprazole). Conclusions: This review supports the clinical relevance of predominant polarity as a course specifier for BD. Future studies should investigate the role of baseline, predominant polarity as an outcome predictor of BD maintenance RCTs. Keywords:
dc.format.extent11 p.
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdf
dc.identifier.idgrec645622
dc.identifier.issn1461-1457
dc.identifier.pmid25522415
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2445/104177
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherCambridge University Press
dc.relation.isformatofReproducció del document publicat a: https://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyu079
dc.relation.ispartofInternational Journal of Neuropsychopharmacology, 2015, vol. 18, num. 2
dc.relation.urihttps://doi.org/10.1093/ijnp/pyu079
dc.rights(c) CINP (Collegium Internationale Neuro-Psychopharmacologicum) , 2015
dc.rights.accessRightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.sourceArticles publicats en revistes (Medicina)
dc.subject.classificationTrastorn bipolar
dc.subject.classificationNeuropsicofarmacologia
dc.subject.classificationTrastorns afectius
dc.subject.otherManic-depressive illness
dc.subject.otherNeuropsychopharmacology
dc.subject.otherAffective disorders
dc.titleTreatment implications of predominant polarity and the polarity index: a comprehensive review.
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Fitxers

Paquet original

Mostrant 1 - 1 de 1
Carregant...
Miniatura
Nom:
645622.pdf
Mida:
662.17 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format