Akiskal H S, Akiskal K K, Lancrenon S, Hantouche E
Department of Psychiatry and International Mood Center, University of California at San Diego, VA Hospital San Diego, CA 92161, USA.
J Affect Disord. 2006 Dec;96(3):207-13. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2006.03.011. Epub 2006 May 2.
Much of the current literature on bipolar disorder is focused on bipolar I (BP-I), and to a much lesser extent on bipolar II (BP-II). The French multi-center national EPIDEP study has, among its objectives, the feasibility of validating a broader spectrum of bipolarity (the so-called "soft spectrum") by practicing clinicians. In this report we test aspects of a bipolar schema proposed earlier by Akiskal and Pinto [Akiskal, H.S., Pinto, O., 1999. The evolving bipolar spectrum: Prototypes I, II, III, IV. Psychiatr. Clin. North Am. 22: 517-534.].
EPIDEP was scheduled in three phases: Phase 1 to recruit DSM-IV major depressives; Phase 2 to assess hypomania and affective temperaments; and Phase 3 to obtain history on course of illness, family history, and comorbidity. Comparative analyses are presented between affective subgroups constructed on a hierarchical basis: spontaneous hypomania (BP-II), cyclothymic temperament (BP-II 1/2), antidepressant-associated hypomania (BP-III), hyperthymic temperament (BP-IV), versus "strict unipolar" (UP).
We present data on 490 patients for whom we obtained full assessment during all three phases of the study, classified as BP-II 1/2 (N=164), II (N=61), III (N=28), IV (N=22), as well as UP (N=174) as the reference nonbipolar group. Systematic inter-group comparison among the soft spectrum showed significant differences along clinical, descriptive, course, pharmacologic response and familial affective disorder patterns, which confirm the heterogeneity of the soft bipolar spectrum, with special characteristics for each of the subgroups. In terms of external validation, familial bipolar loading characterized all soft bipolar subgroups except type IV.
Data collection conducted in a practice setting, clinicians cannot be entirely held "blind" to all measures. This is an exploratory attempt, with many variables examined, to help characterize the clinical terrain of soft bipolarity.
This is nonetheless the first systematic clinical attempt to validate the bipolar spectrum beyond mania (BP-I). BP-II 1/2, BP-III and BP-IV appeared distinct from BP-II and strict UP -- along most of the variables examined. BP-II 1/2 -- with early onset complex temperament structure, and high mood instability, rapid switching, irritable ("dark") hypomania and suicidality -- emerged as the most prevalent and severe expression of the bipolar spectrum, and accounting for 33% of all MDE. These results, which are of great public health relevance, testify to the cyclic nature of bipolarity in its softest expressions. The soft phenotypes are also of interest for genetic investigations of bipolar disorder.
当前关于双相情感障碍的许多文献都聚焦于双相 I 型(BP-I),而对双相 II 型(BP-II)的关注程度要低得多。法国多中心全国性 EPIDEP 研究的目标之一,是由临床医生验证更广泛的双相谱系(即所谓的“软谱系”)的可行性。在本报告中,我们测试了 Akiskal 和 Pinto 之前提出的双相模式的各个方面[Akiskal, H.S., Pinto, O., 1999. 不断演变的双相谱系:原型 I、II、III、IV。《北美精神病学临床》22: 517 - 534]。
EPIDEP 分为三个阶段:第一阶段招募符合《精神疾病诊断与统计手册》第四版(DSM-IV)的重度抑郁症患者;第二阶段评估轻躁狂和情感气质;第三阶段获取疾病病程、家族史和共病情况的病史。对基于层次构建的情感亚组进行了比较分析:自发轻躁狂(BP-II)、环性心境气质(BP-II 1/2)、抗抑郁药相关轻躁狂(BP-III)、情感高涨气质(BP-IV),与“严格单相”(UP)进行对比。
我们展示了在研究的所有三个阶段都获得全面评估的 490 名患者的数据,将其分类为 BP-II 1/2(N = 164)、II(N = 61)、III(N = 28)、IV(N = 22),以及作为参考非双相组的 UP(N = 174)。软谱系组间的系统比较显示,在临床、描述性、病程、药理反应和家族性情感障碍模式方面存在显著差异,这证实了软双相谱系的异质性,每个亚组都有其特殊特征。在外部验证方面,除 IV 型外,家族性双相负荷特征存在于所有软双相亚组中。
在实际临床环境中进行数据收集,临床医生无法对所有测量完全“不知情”。这是一次探索性尝试,检查了许多变量,以帮助描绘软双相情感障碍的临床情况。
尽管如此,这是首次超越躁狂(BP-I)对双相谱系进行系统临床验证的尝试。BP-II 1/2、BP-III 和 BP-IV 在大多数所检查的变量方面似乎与 BP-II 和严格的 UP 不同。BP-II 1/2——具有早发复杂的气质结构、高度情绪不稳定、快速转换、易激惹(“阴暗”)的轻躁狂和自杀倾向——成为双相谱系中最普遍和最严重的表现形式,占所有重度抑郁发作(MDE)的 33%。这些具有重大公共卫生意义的结果证明了双相情感障碍在其最温和表现形式中的周期性本质。这些软表型对于双相情感障碍的基因研究也具有重要意义。