Comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatments for the treatment of acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

J Affect Disord. 2020 May 15:269:154-184. doi: 10.1016/j.jad.2020.03.030. Epub 2020 Mar 20.

Abstract

Objective: We investigated the comparative efficacy and tolerability of pharmacological treatment strategies for the treatment of acute bipolar depression.

Data sources: A systematic review and network meta-analysis was conducted by searching eight registries for published and unpublished, double-blind, randomized controlled trials of pharmacotherapies for the acute treatment of bipolar depression.

Data extraction and synthesis: PRISMA guidelines were used for abstracting data, while the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool was used to assess data quality. Data extraction was done independently by two reviewers, with discrepancies resolved by consensus. Data were pooled using a random-effects model.

Main outcomes and measures: Primary outcomes were efficacy (response and remission rate) and acceptability (completion of treatment and dropouts due to adverse events). Summary odds ratios (ORs) were estimated using pairwise and network meta-analysis with random effects.

Results: Identified citations (4,404) included 50 trials comprising 11,448 participants. Escitalopram, phenelzine, moclobemide, carbamazepine, sertraline, lithium, paroxetine, aripiprazole, gabapentin and ziprasidone appear to be ineffective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression. Divalproex, olanzapine/fluoxetine, olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine, and lamotrigine, appear to be effective as compared to placebo in treatment of bipolar depression according to the network meta-analysis. Aripiprazole showed higher discontinuation rates versus placebo due to the appearance of any adverse event. Quetiapine was better than placebo at reducing treatment-emergent affective switches. For Bipolar I Disorder, cariprazine, fluoxetine, imipramine, lamotrigine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at response, while fluoxetine, imipramine, cariprazine, lurasidone, olanzapine-fluoxetine, and olanzapine were significantly better than placebo at remission.

Conclusions and relevance: These results could serve evidence-based practice and inform patients, physicians, guideline developers, and policymakers on the relative benefits of the different antidepressants, antipsychotics, and mood-stabilizing agents for the treatment of bipolar depression.

Registration: PROSPERO (CRD42019122172).

Keywords: Bipolar disorder; Comparative effectiveness; Depression; Meta-analysis; Pharmacotherapies; Review.

Publication types

  • Meta-Analysis
  • Review
  • Systematic Review

MeSH terms

  • Antipsychotic Agents* / adverse effects
  • Bipolar Disorder* / drug therapy
  • Humans
  • Lurasidone Hydrochloride / therapeutic use
  • Network Meta-Analysis
  • Olanzapine / therapeutic use

Substances

  • Antipsychotic Agents
  • Olanzapine
  • Lurasidone Hydrochloride