3rd Department of Psychiatry, School of Medicine Aristotle University of Thessaloniki Greece; Hospital Clinic, Institute of Neuroscience, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERSAM, Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain; Centre for Affective Disorders, Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience, King's College, London, United Kingdom; Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Mood Disorders Centre of Excellence, Djavad Mowafaghian Centre for Brain Health, Vancouver, Canada; Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria; The Royal Institute of Mental Health Research, Department of Psychiatry, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Psychiatric Department Ludwig Maximilians University, Munich, Germany; Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Int J Neuropsychopharmacol. 2017 Feb 1;20(2):196-205. doi: 10.1093/ijnp/pyw072.
The current fourth paper on the International College of Neuropsychopharmacology guidelines for the treatment of bipolar disorder reports on the unmet needs that became apparent after an extensive review of the literature and also serves as a conclusion to the project of the International College of Neuropsychopharmacology workgroup.
The systematic review of the literature that was performed to develop the International College of Neuropsychopharmacology guidelines for bipolar disorder identified and classified a number of potential shortcomings.
Problems identified concerned the reliability and validity of the diagnosis of bipolar disorder and especially of bipolar depression. This, in turn, has profound consequences for early detection and correct treatment of the disorder. Another area that needs improvement is the unsatisfactory efficacy and effectiveness of therapeutic options, especially in special populations such as those with mixed features and rapid cycling course. Gender issues and adherence problems constitute an additional challenge. The literature suggests that while treatment providers are concerned more with treatment-related issues, patients and their caregivers worry more about issues pertaining to the availability of services and care, quality of life, and various types of burden. The workgroup identified additional unmet needs related to the current standard of research in bipolar disorder. These include the fragmentation of bipolar disorder into phases that are handled as being almost absolutely independent from each other, and thus the development of an overall therapeutic strategy on the basis of the existing evidence is very difficult. Trials are not always designed in a way that outcomes cover the most important aspects of bipolar disorder, and often the reporting of the results is biased and unsatisfactory. The data on combination treatments and high dosages are sparse, whereas they are common in real world practice.
The workgroup endorses the full release of raw study data to the scientific community, and the development of uniform clinical trial standards (also including more realistic outcomes) and the reporting of results. The 2 large appendices summarize the results of this systematic review with regard to the areas of lack of knowledge where further focused research is necessary.
当前关于双相情感障碍治疗的国际神经精神药理学学院指南的第四份文件报告了广泛文献回顾后明显存在的未满足需求,也是国际神经精神药理学学院工作组项目的结论。
为制定双相情感障碍国际神经精神药理学学院指南而进行的文献系统回顾确定并分类了一些潜在的不足。
确定的问题涉及双相情感障碍和特别是双相抑郁的诊断的可靠性和有效性。这反过来又对疾病的早期发现和正确治疗产生了深远的影响。另一个需要改进的领域是治疗选择的效果不尽如人意,尤其是在混合特征和快速循环病程等特殊人群中。性别问题和依从性问题构成了另一个挑战。文献表明,尽管治疗提供者更关注与治疗相关的问题,但患者及其护理人员更担心与服务和护理的可用性、生活质量以及各种类型的负担有关的问题。工作组确定了与双相情感障碍当前研究标准相关的其他未满足需求。这些需求包括将双相情感障碍分为几乎完全独立的阶段,因此很难根据现有证据制定整体治疗策略。试验并不总是以涵盖双相情感障碍最重要方面的方式设计,并且结果的报告往往存在偏见和不令人满意。关于联合治疗和高剂量的数据稀疏,而在现实世界实践中却很常见。
工作组支持向科学界全面发布原始研究数据,并制定统一的临床试验标准(包括更现实的结果)以及结果报告。两个附录总结了本次系统回顾在需要进一步重点研究的缺乏知识领域的结果。