TY - JOUR
T1 - Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments in the maintenance treatment of bipolar disorder
T2 - A systematic review and network meta-analysis
AU - Miura, Tomofumi
AU - Noma, Hisashi
AU - Furukawa, Toshi A.
AU - Mitsuyasu, Hiroshi
AU - Tanaka, Shiro
AU - Stockton, Sarah
AU - Salanti, Georgia
AU - Motomura, Keisuke
AU - Shimano-Katsuki, Satomi
AU - Leucht, Stefan
AU - Cipriani, Andrea
AU - Geddes, John R.
AU - Kanba, Shigenobu
N1 - Funding Information:
TM has received honoraria for lectures from GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly Japan, Meiji Seika Pharma, Otsuka, Pfizer, Dainippon Sumitomo, Chugai Pharmaceutical, and Mochida, royalties from the Japan Council for Quality Health Care. HN has received a lecture fee from Boehringer Ingelheim, and grants from the Japan Society of the Promotion of Science KAKENHI, the Japanese Ministry of the Environment, and the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. TAF has received lecture fees from Eli Lilly, Meiji, Mochida, MSD, Pfizer, and Tanabe-Mitsubishi; consultancy fees from Sekisui and Takeda Science Foundation; and royalties from Igaku-Shoin, Seiwa-Shoten, and Nihon Bunka Kagaku-sha. HM has received honoraria from Mitsubishi Tanabe, Meiji Seika Pharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Pfizer, MSD, Astellas, Otsuka, and Dainippon Sumitomo. ST has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Ono Pharmaceutical, and CanBas, and grant or research support from Asahi Kasei Pharma and the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. KM has received grant or research support from Ono and Eli Lilly, and honoraria from Eli Lilly, Meiji Seika Pharma, Otsuka, Pfizer, and Shionogi. SL has received honoraria for lectures from AbbVie, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, ICON, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Sanofi-Aventis, Lundbeck, and Pfizer; honoraria for consulting or advisory boards from Roche, Eli Lilly, Medavante, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Alkermes, Janssen, Johnson & Johnson, and Lundbeck; and Eli Lilly has provided medication for a study with SL as primary investigator. JRG is an UK National Institute of Health Research senior investigator and chief investigator on the independent, UK Medical Research Council-funded CEQUEL trial, to which GlaxoSmithKline contributed the investigational drugs. SK has received honoraria from Pfizer, Janssen, GlaxoSmithKline, Eli Lilly Japan, Eisai, Meiji Seika Pharma, Taisho Toyama, Astellas, Ono, Mochida, Otsuka, Abott Japan, Shionogi, Dainippon Sumitomo, Nippon-Chemifa, Yoshitomiyakuhin, and MSD; and has received grant or research support from Pfizer, Ono, GlaxoSmithKline, Astellas, Janssen, Yoshitomiyakuhin, Eli Lilly Japan, Otsuka, Mochida, Daiichi-Sankyo, Dainippon Sumitomo, Meiji Seika Pharma, Shionogi, Eisai, and the Japanese Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare. All other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Information:
We thank the following authors and pharmaceutical companies for providing additional information for the included studies: Eduard Vieta, Joseph Calabrese, AstraZeneca, Otsuka, and Eli Lilly. We also thank for Vladimir Saenko for helping us to translate Russian articles into English. TM acknowledges support from the Japan Society of the Promotion of Science Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research C (KAKENHI, grant number 24591722 ). SK acknowledges support from the Health and Labour Science Research Grants programme (number H24-Seishin-Jitsuyouka (Seishin)-Ippan-001). GS acknowledges support from the European Research Council Starting Grant IDEAS ( project IMMA 260559 ). AC acknowledges support from the UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Oxford Cognitive Health Clinical Research Facility. JRG acknowledges support from the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care Oxford at Oxford Health National Health Service (NHS) Foundation Trust. The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2014 Elsevier Ltd.
PY - 2014/10/1
Y1 - 2014/10/1
N2 - Background: Lithium is the established standard in the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder, but several new drugs have been assessed for this indication. We did a network meta-analysis to investigate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of available pharmacological treatment strategies for bipolar disorder. Methods: We systematically searched Embase, Medline, PreMedline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials published before June 28, 2013, that compared active treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo), either as monotherapy or as add-on treatment, for at least 12 weeks. The primary outcomes were the number of participants with recurrence of any mood episode, and the number of participants who discontinued the trial because of adverse events. We assessed efficacy and tolerability of bipolar treatments using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. Findings: We screened 114 potentially eligible studies and identified 33 randomised controlled trials, published between 1970 and 2012, that examined 17 treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo) in 6846 participants. Participants assigned to all assessed treatments had a significantly lower risk of any mood relapse or recurrence compared with placebo, except for those assigned to aripiprazole (risk ratio [RR] 0·62, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0·38-1·03), carbamazepine (RR 0·68, 0·44-1·06), imipramine (RR 0·95, 0·66-1·36), and paliperidone (RR 0·84, 0·56-1·24). Lamotrigine and placebo were significantly better tolerated than carbamazepine (lamotrigine, RR 5·24, 1·07-26·32; placebo, RR 3·60, 1·04-12·94), lithium (RR 3·76, 1·13-12·66; RR 2·58, 1·33-5·39), or lithium plus valproate (RR 5·95, 1·02-33·33; RR 4·09, 1·01-16·96). Interpretation: Although most of the drugs analysed were more efficacious than placebo and generally well tolerated, differences in the quality of evidence and the side-effect profiles should be taken into consideration by clinicians and patients. In view of the efficacy in prevention of both manic episode and depressive episode relapse or recurrence and the better quality of the supporting evidence, lithium should remain the first-line treatment when prescribing a relapse-prevention drug in patients with bipolar disorder, notwithstanding its tolerability profile. Funding: None.
AB - Background: Lithium is the established standard in the long-term treatment of bipolar disorder, but several new drugs have been assessed for this indication. We did a network meta-analysis to investigate the comparative efficacy and tolerability of available pharmacological treatment strategies for bipolar disorder. Methods: We systematically searched Embase, Medline, PreMedline, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomised controlled trials published before June 28, 2013, that compared active treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo), either as monotherapy or as add-on treatment, for at least 12 weeks. The primary outcomes were the number of participants with recurrence of any mood episode, and the number of participants who discontinued the trial because of adverse events. We assessed efficacy and tolerability of bipolar treatments using a random-effects network meta-analysis within a Bayesian framework. Findings: We screened 114 potentially eligible studies and identified 33 randomised controlled trials, published between 1970 and 2012, that examined 17 treatments for bipolar disorder (or placebo) in 6846 participants. Participants assigned to all assessed treatments had a significantly lower risk of any mood relapse or recurrence compared with placebo, except for those assigned to aripiprazole (risk ratio [RR] 0·62, 95% credible interval [CrI] 0·38-1·03), carbamazepine (RR 0·68, 0·44-1·06), imipramine (RR 0·95, 0·66-1·36), and paliperidone (RR 0·84, 0·56-1·24). Lamotrigine and placebo were significantly better tolerated than carbamazepine (lamotrigine, RR 5·24, 1·07-26·32; placebo, RR 3·60, 1·04-12·94), lithium (RR 3·76, 1·13-12·66; RR 2·58, 1·33-5·39), or lithium plus valproate (RR 5·95, 1·02-33·33; RR 4·09, 1·01-16·96). Interpretation: Although most of the drugs analysed were more efficacious than placebo and generally well tolerated, differences in the quality of evidence and the side-effect profiles should be taken into consideration by clinicians and patients. In view of the efficacy in prevention of both manic episode and depressive episode relapse or recurrence and the better quality of the supporting evidence, lithium should remain the first-line treatment when prescribing a relapse-prevention drug in patients with bipolar disorder, notwithstanding its tolerability profile. Funding: None.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84919959977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84919959977&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70314-1
DO - 10.1016/S2215-0366(14)70314-1
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:84919959977
SN - 2215-0366
VL - 1
SP - 351
EP - 359
JO - The Lancet Psychiatry
JF - The Lancet Psychiatry
IS - 5
ER -