• Bipolar
  • What Happens Now? The Importance...

What Happens Now? The Importance of Naturalistic Course After First Mania

Article Abstract

Because this piece does not have an abstract, we have provided for your benefit the first 3 sentences of the full text.

Bipolar disorder presents a substantial burden to patients and their loved ones because of its recurrent nature, persistent symptoms, and associated comorbid conditions. The first episode occurs most frequently before the age of 25 years and is among the top 10 causes of disability-adjusted life years among youth worldwide. With a population estimate of 74 million youth in the United States (www.childstats.gov), about 3% or 2.2 million will meet criteria for bipolar disorder, in sharp contrast to about 15,800 cases of childhood cancer (www.cancer.gov; a ratio of about 140:1).

This work may not be copied, distributed, displayed, published, reproduced, transmitted, modified, posted, sold, licensed, or used for commercial purposes. By downloading this file, you are agreeing to the publisher’s Terms & Conditions.

See article by Gignac et al

What Happens Now? The Importance of Naturalistic Course After First Mania

Bipolar disorder presents a substantial burden to patients and their loved ones because of its recurrent nature, persistent symptoms, and associated comorbid conditions.1 The first episode occurs most frequently before the age of 25 years and is among the top 10 causes of disability-adjusted life years among youth worldwide.2,3 With a population estimate of 74 million youth in the United States (www.childstats.gov), about 3%4 or 2.2 million will meet criteria for bipolar disorder, in sharp contrast to about 15,800 cases of childhood cancer (www.cancer.gov; a ratio of about 140:1). If the diagnosis is expanded to those who have a bipolar spectrum, the numbers of those affected double.

Studying Natural Course

Because of the public health importance of bipolar disorder and its recurrent and chronic nature, it is imperative to understand the natural course of the disorder to better inform patients and families about what to expect. Additionally, pharmacologic treatments for bipolar disorder carry unpleasant and difficult-to-tolerate side effects that are particularly challenging for youth (and anyone else) to take for a long time; clear information about natural course is essential so that patients and their families can decide about the benefits and risks of discontinuing or refraining from long-term treatment. To obtain this information, we need to follow patients from their first episode to construct an inception cohort. The study by Gignac and colleagues5 does this by integrating findings from the literature to provide a prognostic model essential to help patients and clinicians alike to understand the benefits and risks of treatment. To determine the naturalistic course of an inception bipolar cohort, it would be optimal to follow untreated patients, an option neither ethical nor practical. The next option is to identify patients at the time of their first mood episode (depressive or manic) or their first hospitalization—and then follow them for as long as possible. Several obstacles can make interpretation of these longitudinal data difficult: patients who are more disabled will refuse to participate or drop out of the study more frequently than those less disabled (volunteer bias); those with more comorbid conditions, especially substance abuse disorders or anxiety, have a similar volunteer bias; treatments may be given (and taken) consistent (or not) with state-of-the-art guidelines (treatment effect bias); our imperfect treatments cause substantial adverse effects that can accumulate over time with frequent shifts of treatment to lessen this burden; and antidepressants, the class with the least data supporting its use6 but most frequently prescribed, can worsen the course by causing mixed states, rapid cycling, or treatment-emergent affective switch to mania or hypomania. Additionally, with increasing evidence about the importance of psychotherapy,7,8 especially for those with comorbid anxiety,9 the inclusion of those patients who receive psychotherapy in longitudinal studies would clarify the effectiveness of this important intervention. Thus, it would be optimal to follow a cohort with guideline-concordant treatment (including psychotherapy) so that we know the outcomes under the best treatment conditions. For many complex logistical reasons, such a study is unlikely to happen. We will need to make do with what is available.

In the meta-analysis by Gignac and colleagues, they used an index manic episode or hospitalization for mania as the seminal event. Over 80% of the cohort had psychotic mania. Studies included were published as early as 1990 and as late as 2009, with dropout rates between 11% and 38%. Treatment patterns have shifted since then, away from lithium and more toward second and third generation antipsychotics along with a rise in the use of lamotrigine (and, as mentioned before, with continued use of antidepressants despite studies that question their use6). Injectable antipsychotics are now available, with some evidence of better outcomes10 but with limited use. Nevertheless, let’s examine the clinical implications of the results of this important meta-analysis.

Clinical Significance

Overall, over 80% reached syndromal recovery within 6 months, leaving a substantial minority who did not. Outcomes were not improved when expanded to a 12-month follow-up—ie, those who recovered mostly did so within the first 6 months. So the good news is that most will recover, but the bad news is that many will not—and perhaps those who do not recover should be the subject of intense investigation to find treatments that work. Raising the bar, the authors found that symptomatic recovery occurred in over 60% of patients at 1 year. Here again, however, understanding outcomes of the remaining 40% is critical to our efforts to find efficacious treatments. Finally, manic, mixed, or depressive recurrence occurred at rates of 25.7% at 6 months, 41.0% at 1 year, and 59.7% by 4 years. When we do the math, if 60% have symptomatic recovery at 1 year and 41% have a recurrence at 1 year (meaning that 59% remain free of recurrence), then the proportion who remain well and are free of recurrence after their first manic episode or hospitalization is about 59% of 60% or about 35%. In other words, 65% will not be well after a year. These data are consistent with the 12-month observational outcome data from STEP-BD11 and the 6-month data from the comparative effectiveness study LiTMUS12 that compared moderate tolerable doses of lithium with optimal personalized treatment (OPT) versus OPT without lithium. In those studies, about 25% fully recovered and stayed well for 6 to 12 months; these results include those with guideline-concordant treatment (but not with psychotherapy) as all participants were treated by experts in managing bipolar disorder. The observation that most improvement occurred within the first 6 months also supports the design of LiTMUS as well as the design of Bipolar CHOICE13—a study that compared lithium and quetiapine as the base of treatment.

What are the implications of the findings from this meta-analysis? First, we need better treatments. Second, we need to better use the treatments we have. This is especially true for psychotherapy, given the empirical support for various psychosocial treatment modalities14 such as family-focused treatment, family psychoeducation,15-18 cognitive-behavioral therapy,19,20 interpersonal and social rhythm therapy,21,22 and group psychoeducation22 in improving medication adherence, preventing mood episode recurrences, reducing residual mood symptoms, and improving psychosocial functioning. Third, we need better interventions to address comorbid problems that patients with bipolar disorder often face, among them cognitive deficits,24,25 anxiety disorders, and emotion regulation difficulties.26 Fourth, we need better data about the effects of targeting inflammation and oxidative stress, including smoking cessation.

Our challenge is to find interventions that improve the course of the disorder—whether these include rational polypharmacy, psychotherapy, or lifestyle changes, we clearly need to serve our patients better.

Submitted: October 16, 2014; accepted October 21, 2014.

Potential conflicts of interest: Dr Nierenberg has been a consultant for Abbott, American Psychiatric Association, Appliance Computing (Mindsite), Basliea, Brain Cells, Brandeis University, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Clintara, Corcept, Dainippon Sumitomo (now Sunovion), Dey, Eli Lilly, EpiQ/Mylan, Forest, Genaissance, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline, Hoffman LaRoche, Infomedics, Janssen, Jazz, L.P./Mylan, Lundbeck, Medavante, Merck, Methylation Sciences, Naurex, Novartis, PamLabs, Pfizer, PGx Health, Ridge Diagnostics, Schering-Plough, Shire, Somerset, Sunovion, Takeda, Targacept, and Teva; consulted through the MGH Clinical Trials Network and Institute (CTNI) for AstraZeneca, Brain Cells, Dainippon Sumitomo/Sepracor, Johnson & Johnson, Labopharm, Merck, Methylation Science, Novartis, PGx Health, Schering-Plough, Shire, Takeda/Lundbeck, and Targacept; has received grant/research support from AHRQ, American Foundation for Suicide Prevention, Brain and Behavior Research Foundation, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Cederroth, Cephalon, Cyberonics, Elan, Eli Lilly, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lichtwer, Marriott Foundation, Mylan, NIMH, PamLabs, PCORI, Pfizer, Shire, Stanley Foundation, Takeda, and Wyeth-Ayerst; has received honoraria from American Drug Utilization Review, American Society for Clinical Psychopharmacology, APSARD, Baystate Medical Center, Belvoir Publishing, Brandeis University, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Columbia University, CRICO, Dartmouth Medical School, Health New England, Harold Grinspoon Charitable Foundation, Hillside Hospital, Imedex, International Society for Bipolar Disorders, Israel Society for Biological Psychiatry, Johns Hopkins University, MBL Publishing, Medscape, MGH Psychiatry Academy, MJ Consulting, National Association of Continuing Education, New York State, Physicians Postgraduate Press, SciMed, Slack Publishing, SUNY Buffalo, University of Miami, University of Michigan, University of Texas Southwestern Dallas, University of Pisa, University of Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin at Madison, and Wolters Klower Publishing; has stock ownership in Appliance Computing (MindSite), Brain Cells, and Medavante; and holds copyright to Clinical Positive Affect Scale and the MGH Structured Clinical Interview for the Montgomery-Asberg Depression Scale exclusively licensed to the MGH Clinical Trials Network and Institute (CTNI). Dr Nierenberg has not been on any speakers bureaus since 2003. Dr Sylvia has served as a consultant for Clintara and Bracket, and has received grant/research support from NIMH, PCORI, Takeda, and AFSP, royalties from New Harbinger, and honoraria from the Massachusetts General Hospital Psychiatry Academy. Dr Ellard has received grant/research support from from Takeda, Otsuka, the US Army DARPA Subnets (grant W911NF-14-2-0045), and the National Institute of Mental Health (grant 5U01MH092211-02). Drs Ghaznavi and Deckersbach report no conflicts relevant to the subject of this commentary.

Funding/support: Dr Ellard is supported by grant W911NF-14-2-0045 from US Army DARPA SUBNETS and grant 5U01MH092221-02 from the US National Institute of Mental Health.


1. Merikangas KR, Akiskal HS, Angst J, et al. Lifetime and 12-month prevalence of bipolar spectrum disorder in the National Comorbidity Survey replication. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2007;64(5):543-552. PubMed doi:10.1001/archpsyc.64.5.543

2. Merikangas KR, He JP, Burstein M, et al. Lifetime prevalence of mental disorders in US adolescents: results from the National Comorbidity Survey Replication—Adolescent Supplement (NCS-A). J Am Acad Child Adolesc Psychiatry. 2010;49(10):980-989. PubMed doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2010.05.017

3. Gore FM, Bloem PJN, Patton GC, et al. Global burden of disease in young people aged 10-24 years: a systematic analysis. Lancet. 2011;377(9783):2093-2102. PubMed doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60512-6

4. Kessler RC, Avenevoli S, McLaughlin KA, et al. Lifetime co-morbidity of DSM-IV disorders in the US national comorbidity survey replication adolescent supplement (NCS-A). Psychol Med. 2012;42(9):1997-2010. PubMed doi:10.1017/S0033291712000025

5. Gignac A, McGirr A, Lam RW, et al. Recovery and recurrence following a first episode of mania: a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospectively characterized cohorts. J Clin Psychiatry. 2015;76(9):1241-1248.

6. Pacchiarotti I, Bond DJ, Baldessarini RJ, et al. The International Society for Bipolar Disorders (ISBD) task force report on antidepressant use in bipolar disorders. Am J Psychiatry. 2013;170(11):1249-1262. PubMed

7. Miklowitz DJ, Otto MW. Psychosocial interventions for bipolar disorder: a review of literature and introduction of the systematic treatment enhancement program. Psychopharmacol Bull. 2007;40(4):116-131. PubMed

8. Miklowitz DJ, Otto MW, Frank E, et al. Intensive psychosocial intervention enhances functioning in patients with bipolar depression: results from a 9-month randomized controlled trial. Am J Psychiatry. 2007;164(9):1340-1347. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2007.07020311

9. Deckersbach T, Peters AT, Sylvia L, et al. Do comorbid anxiety disorders moderate the effects of psychotherapy for bipolar disorder? results from STEP-BD. Am J Psychiatry. 2014;171(2):178-186. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2013.13020225

10. Bobo WV, Epstein RA, Lynch A, et al. A randomized open comparison of long-acting injectable risperidone and treatment as usual for prevention of relapse, rehospitalization, and urgent care referral in community-treated patients with rapid cycling bipolar disorder. Clin Neuropharmacol. 2011;34(6):224-233. PubMed doi:10.1097/WNF.0b013e318237709a

11. Perlis RH, Ostacher MJ, Patel JK, et al. Predictors of recurrence in bipolar disorder: primary outcomes from the Systematic Treatment Enhancement Program for Bipolar Disorder (STEP-BD). Am J Psychiatry. 2006;163(2):217-224. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.163.2.217

12. Nierenberg AA, Friedman ES, Bowden CL, et al. Lithium treatment moderate-dose use study (LiTMUS) for bipolar disorder: a randomized comparative effectiveness trial of optimized personalized treatment with and without lithium. Am J Psychiatry. 2013;170(1):102-110. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12060751

13. Nierenberg AA, Sylvia LG, Leon AC, et al; Bipolar CHOICE Study Group. Clinical and Health Outcomes Initiative in Comparative Effectiveness for Bipolar Disorder (Bipolar CHOICE): a pragmatic trial of complex treatment for a complex disorder. Clin Trials. 2014;11(1):114-127 doi:10.1177/1740774513512184. PubMed

14. Miklowitz DJ. Adjunctive psychotherapy for bipolar disorder: state of the evidence. Am J Psychiatry. 2008;165(11):1408-1419. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.08040488

15. Miklowitz DJ, George EL, Richards JA, et al. A randomized study of family-focused psychoeducation and pharmacotherapy in the outpatient management of bipolar disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60(9):904-912. PubMed doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.9.904

16. Rea MM, Tompson MC, Miklowitz DJ, et al. Family-focused treatment versus individual treatment for bipolar disorder: results of a randomized clinical trial. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2003;71(3):482-492. PubMed doi:10.1037/0022-006X.71.3.482

17. Clarkin JF, Carpenter D, Hull J, et al. Effects of psychoeducational intervention for married patients with bipolar disorder and their spouses. Psychiatr Serv. 1998;49(4):531-533. PubMed

18. Miklowitz DJ. Bipolar Disorder: A Family-Focused Treatment Approach. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Guilford Press; 2008.

19. Cochran SD. Preventing medical noncompliance in the outpatient treatment of bipolar affective disorders. J Consult Clin Psychol. 1984;52(5):873-878. PubMed doi:10.1037/0022-006X.52.5.873

20. Lam DH, Hayward P, Watkins ER, et al. Relapse prevention in patients with bipolar disorder: cognitive therapy outcome after 2 years. Am J Psychiatry. 2005;162(2):324-329. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.162.2.324

21. Frank E, Kupfer DJ, Thase ME, et al. Two-year outcomes for interpersonal and social rhythm therapy in individuals with bipolar I disorder. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2005;62(9):996-1004. PubMed doi:10.1001/archpsyc.62.9.996

22. Frank E, Soreca I, Swartz HA, et al. The role of interpersonal and social rhythm therapy in improving occupational functioning in patients with bipolar I disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2008;165(12):1559-1565. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2008.07121953

23. Colom F, Vieta E, Martinez-Aran A, et al. A randomized trial on the efficacy of group psychoeducation in the prophylaxis of recurrences in bipolar patients whose disease is in remission. Arch Gen Psychiatry. 2003;60(4):402-407. PubMed doi:10.1001/archpsyc.60.4.402

24. Deckersbach T, Nierenberg AA, Kessler R, et al. RESEARCH: cognitive rehabilitation for bipolar disorder: an open trial for employed patients with residual depressive symptoms. CNS Neurosci Ther. 2010;16(5):298-307. PubMed doi:10.1111/j.1755-5949.2009.00110.x

25. Torrent C, Bonnin CM, Mart×­nez-Arán A, et al. Efficacy of functional remediation in bipolar disorder: a multicenter randomized controlled study. Am J Psychiatry. 2013;170(8):852-859. PubMed doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.2012.12070971

26. Ellard KK, Deckersbach T, Sylvia LG, et al. Transdiagnostic treatment of bipolar disorder and comorbid anxiety with the unified protocol: a clinical replication series. Behav Modif. 2012;36(4):482-508. PubMed doi:10.1177/0145445512451272

aDepartment of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston bHarvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.

*Corresponding author: Andrew A. Nierenberg, MD, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, 50 Staniford St, 5th Floor, Boston, MA 02114 (anierenberg@mgh.harvard.edu).

J Clin Psychiatry 2015;76(9):e1161-e1163

Related Articles

Volume: 76

Quick Links: Bipolar

Continue Reading…