• Ten-year outcomes in first episode psychotic major depression patients compared with schizophrenia and bipolar patients

      Lomas, Benjamin (2016)
      We aimed to investigate long-term outcomes in psychotic major depression patients compared to schizophrenia and bipolar/manic psychosis patients, in an incidence sample, while accounting for diagnostic change. Based on Aetiology and Ethnicity in Schizophrenia and Other Psychoses (ÆSOP and ÆSOP-10), a first episode psychosis cohort was followed-up 10years after first presentation. The Schedules for Clinical Assessment in Neuropsychiatry, WHO Life Chart and Global Assessment of Functioning were used to assess clinical, social and service use outcomes. Seventy-two PMD patients, 218 schizophrenia patients and 70 psychotic bipolar disorder/mania patients were identified at baseline. Differences in outcome between PMD and bipolar patients based on baseline and lifetime diagnosis were minimal. Differences in clinical, social and service use outcomes between PMD and schizophrenia were more substantial with PMD patients showing better outcomes on most variables. However, there was some weak evidence (albeit not quite statistically significant at p<0.05) based on lifetime diagnoses that PMD patients were more likely to attempt suicide (OR 2.31, CI 0.98-5.42, p0.055) and self-harm (OR 2.34, CI 0.97-5.68, p0.060). PMD patients have better social and service use outcomes compared to people with schizophrenia, but may be more likely to attempt suicide or self-harm. This unique profile is important for clinicians to consider in any risk assessment.; Copyright © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
    • The role of beliefs about mood swings in determining outcome in bipolar disorder

      Morriss, Richard K. (2013)
      This study explored the impact of beliefs about mood swings on symptomatic outcome in bipolar disorder (BD). Ninety-one people with BD completed a Brief Illness Perception Questionnaire at baseline. Outcome was measured using weekly measures of mood and time to relapse over the following 24 weeks. Beliefs about the consequences of mood swings [Hazard ratio (HR) = 1.38, 95 % CI = (1.07,1.77)], perceived symptoms associated with mood swings [HR = 0.75, 95 % CI = (0.59,0.95)], and emotional concern about mood swings [HR = 1.30, 95 % CI = (1.04,1.61)] had statistically significant effects on hazard of relapse, while beliefs about the consequences of mood swings [Odds ratio (OR) = 1.24, 95 % CI = (1.01,1.52)] and the amount of personal effort individuals believed they were making to get well [OR = 0.82, 95 % CI = (0.67,1.02)] had important effects on weekly LIFE scores of depressive symptoms controlling for baseline depression, mood stabilizer medication and number of previous bipolar episodes. In conclusion, beliefs about mood swings had important effects on weekly fluctuations in depression severity and time to relapse. © 2012 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC.
    • Treatment-resistant and multi-therapy criteria for bipolar depression: A consensus definition

      Morriss, Richard K. (2019)
      Introduction: Most people with bipolar disorder (BD) spend a significant percentage of their life experiencing either sub-syndromal depressive symptoms or major depressive episodes, which contribute greatly to the high levels of disability and mortality associated with BD. Despite the importance of bipolar depression, there are only a small number of treatment options available. Consecutive treatment failures can quickly exhaust these options leading to treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD). Few studies have evaluated TRBD and those available lack a comprehensive definition of multi-therapy resistant bipolar depression (MTRBD). The aim of this study was to reach consensus regarding threshold definitions criterion for TRBD and MTRBD. <br/>Method(s): Based on the evidence of standard treatments available in the latest BD treatment guidelines, TRBD and MTRBD criteria were agreed by a representative panel of BD experts using a modified Delphi method. <br/>Result(s): TRBD criteria in bipolar depression was defined as failure to reach sustained remission for 8 consecutive weeks after two different treatment trials, at adequate therapeutic doses, with at least two recommended monotherapy treatments or at least one monotherapy treatment and another combination treatment. MTRBD included the same definition as TRBD, with the addition of failure of at least one antidepressant trial, a psychological treatment and a course of electroconvulsive therapy. <br/>Conclusion(s): The proposed TRBD and MTRBD criteria may provide an important signpost to help clinicians and researchers in judging when to consider new non-standard treatments. However, some challenging diagnostic and therapeutic issues were identified in the consensus process which need further evaluation and research.
    • Treatment-resistant and multi-therapy-resistant criteria for bipolar depression: Consensus definition

      Morriss, Richard K. (2019)
      BACKGROUNDMost people with bipolar disorder spend a significant percentage of their lifetime experiencing either subsyndromal depressive symptoms or major depressive episodes, which contribute greatly to the high levels of disability and mortality associated with the disorder. Despite the importance of bipolar depression, there are only a small number of recognised treatment options available. Consecutive treatment failures can quickly exhaust these options leading to treatment-resistant bipolar depression (TRBD). Remarkably few studies have evaluated TRBD and those available lack a comprehensive definition of multi-therapy-resistant bipolar depression (MTRBD).AimsTo reach consensus regarding threshold definitions criteria for TRBD and MTRBD.METHODBased on the evidence of standard treatments available in the latest bipolar disorder treatment guidelines, TRBD and MTRBD criteria were agreed by a representative panel of bipolar disorder experts using a modified Delphi method.RESULTSTRBD criteria in bipolar depression was defined as failure to reach sustained symptomatic remission for 8 consecutive weeks after two different treatment trials, at adequate therapeutic doses, with at least two recommended monotherapy treatments or at least one monotherapy treatment and another combination treatment. MTRBD included the same initial definition as TRBD, with the addition of failure of at least one trial with an antidepressant, a psychological treatment and a course of electroconvulsive therapy.CONCLUSIONSThe proposed TRBD and MTRBD criteria may provide an important signpost to help clinicians, researchers and stakeholders in judging how and when to consider new non-standard treatments. However, some challenging diagnostic and therapeutic issues were identified in the consensus process that need further evaluation and research.Declaration of interestIn the past 3 years, M.B. has received grant/research support from the NIH, Cooperative Research Centre, Simons Autism Foundation, Cancer Council of Victoria, Stanley Medical Research Foundation, MBF, NHMRC, Beyond Blue, Rotary Health, Geelong Medical Research Foundation, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo SmithKline, Meat and Livestock Board, Organon, Novartis, Mayne Pharma, Servier, Woolworths, Avant and the Harry Windsor Foundation, has been a speaker for Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Glaxo SmithKline, Janssen Cilag, Lundbeck, Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Synthelabo, Servier, Solvay and Wyeth and served as a consultant to Allergan, Astra Zeneca, Bioadvantex, Bionomics, Collaborative Medicinal Development, Eli Lilly, Grunbiotics, Glaxo SmithKline, Janssen Cilag, LivaNova, Lundbeck, Merck, Mylan, Otsuka, Pfizer and Servier. A.C. has received fees for lecturing from pharmaceutical companies namely Lundbeck and Sunovion. A.J.C. has in the past 3 years received honoraria for speaking from Astra Zeneca and Lundbeck, honoraria for consulting from Allergan, Janssen, Lundbeck and LivaNova and research grant support from Lundbeck. G.M.G. holds shares in P1Vital and has served as consultant, advisor or CME speaker for Allergan, Angelini, Compass pathways, MSD, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Takeda, Medscape, Minervra, P1Vital, Pfizer, Servier, Shire and Sun Pharma. J.G. has received research funding from National Institute for Health Research, Medical Research Council, Stanley Medical Research Institute and Wellcome. H.G. received grants/research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Gedeon Richter, Genericon, Janssen Cilag, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Pfizer and Servier. R.H.M.-W. has received support for research, expenses to attend conferences and fees for lecturing and consultancy work (including attending advisory boards) from various pharmaceutical companies including Astra Zeneca, Cyberonics, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Liva Nova, Lundbeck, MyTomorrows, Otsuka, Pfizer, Roche, Servier, SPIMACO and Sunovion. R.M. has received research support from Big White Wall, Electromedical Products, Johnson and Johnson, Magstim and P1Vital. S.N. received honoraria from Lundbeck, Jensen and Otsuka. J.C.S. has received funds for research from Alkermes, Pfizer, Allergan, J&amp;J, BMS and been a speaker or consultant for Astellas, Abbott, Sunovion, Sanofi. S.W has, within the past 3 years, attended advisory boards for Sunovion and LivaNova and has undertaken paid lectures for Lundbeck. D.J.S. has received honoraria from Lundbeck. T.S. has reported grants from Pathway Genomics, Stanley Medical Research Institute and Palo Alto Health Sciences; consulting fees from Sunovion Pharamaceuticals Inc.; honoraria from Medscape Education, Global Medical Education and CMEology; and royalties from Jones and Bartlett, UpToDate and Hogrefe Publishing. S.P. has served as a consultant or speaker for Janssen, and Sunovion. P.T. has received consultancy fees as an advisory board member from the following companies: Galen Limited, Sunovion Pharmaceuticals Europe Ltd, myTomorrows and LivaNova. E.V. received grants/ research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Abbott, AB-Biotics, Allergan, Angelini, Dainippon Sumitomo, Ferrer, Gedeon Richter, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka and Sunovion. L.N.Y. has received grants/research support, consulting fees or honoraria from Allergan, Alkermes, Dainippon Sumitomo, Janssen, Lundbeck, Otsuka, Sanofi, Servier, Sunovion, Teva and Valeant. A.H.Y. has undertaken paid lectures and advisory boards for all major pharmaceutical companies with drugs used in affective and related disorders and LivaNova. He has also previously received funding for investigator-initiated studies from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Lundbeck and Wyeth. P.R.A.S. has received research funding support from Corcept Therapeutics Inc. Corcept Therapeutics Inc fully funded attendance at their internal conference in California USA and all related expenses. He has received grant funding from the Medical Research Council UK for a collaborative study with Janssen Research and Development LLC. Janssen Research and Development LLC are providing non-financial contributions to support this study. P.R.A.S. has received a presentation fee from Indivior and an advisory board fee from LivaNova.
    • Users' experiences of an online intervention for bipolar disorder: Important lessons for design and evaluation

      Morriss, Richard K. (2017)
      BACKGROUNDThe evidence base for digital interventions for physical and mental health, including severe and enduring mental health difficulties, is increasing. In a feasibility trial, web-based Enhanced Relapse Prevention (ERPonline) for bipolar disorder demonstrated high recruitment and retention rates. Relative to participants in the waitlist control group, those who received ERPonline showed increased monitoring for early warning signs of relapse and had developed more positive illness models.OBJECTIVETo understand users' motivations and barriers for taking part in an online/telephone-based trial, and for engagement with ERPonline.METHODSParticipants from the trial who had been allocated to receive ERPonline were purposively sampled to participate in telephone-based, in-depth qualitative interviews about their experiences. Interviews (n=19) were analysed using framework analysis to identify themes relevant to study aims.FINDINGSParticipants took part due to the convenient, flexible and rewarding aspects of the trial design, as well as a desire to improve the mental health of themselves and others. Barriers included extensive assessments, practical difficulties and mood. ERPonline was was generally considered to be accessible, relevant and straightforward, but there were individual preferences regarding design, content and who it was for. Several participants reported positive changes, but there was a sense that digital interventions should not replace routine care.CONCLUSIONSThere are a number of barriers and facilitators to consider when evaluating and implementing digital interventions. Individual preferences and human contact were key factors for both trial design and engagement with an online intervention.CLINICAL IMPLICATIONSDigital interventions should be co-produced, personalised, interactive and embedded as one component in a broader package of care.TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERISRCTN56908625; Post-results.
    • Varenicline induces manic relapse in bipolar disorder

      Tsoi, Daniel T. (2011)
      Varenicline (Chantix) is commonly used to assist individuals with smoking cessation. This medication is known to affect mood and behavior. We report a patient with bipolar disorder who developed manic relapse after starting treatment with varenicline for tobacco dependence. Further research is necessary to establish the safety of using varenicline in individuals who have significant mental illness and want to stop smoking.