BACKGROUND: The presence of mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) symptoms may influence treatment outcomes in pediatric bipolar depression. This post-hoc analysis investigated bridge symptoms that have cross-sectional and predictive associations with depressive and manic symptom clusters in youth with bipolar depression. METHODS: The moderating effects of these bridge symptoms on the response to flexibly dosed lurasidone 20-80 mg/d compared to placebo treatment was analyzed in children and adolescents with bipolar I depression in a six-week, placebo-controlled, double-blind study followed by a 2-year, openlabel extension study of lurasidone. RESULTS: Sleep disturbances, assessed by difficulty with sleep (Childrens Depression Rating Scale, Revised [CDRS-R] item 4) and decreased need for sleep (Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] item 4), and irritability (CDRS-R item-8, YMRS item 5) were identified as bridge symptoms and found to have replicable causal associations with depressive (CDRS-R total) and manic symptom clusters (YMRS total) at baseline and week-6. A greater improvement in overall depression severity at week 6 with lurasidone (vs. placebo) treatment was observed in the presence (vs. absence) of decreased need for sleep at study baseline, mediated in part by significant reductions from study baseline in decreased need for sleep and manic symptom severity. The absence of sleep disturbance and irritability in patients at open-label extension study baseline was associated with higher rates of sustained recovery (symptomatic and functional remission) over 6 months compared to patients with those symptoms at baseline (68% vs. 50%, Number Needed to Treat=6). CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that sleep disturbance and irritability are cardinal symptoms that bridge between depressive and manic symptom clusters and influence treatment outcomes in youth with bipolar depression.

Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of lurasidone in the treatment of children and adolescents with bipolar depression presenting with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features. Methods: Patients, 10-17 years of age, with a Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5th ed. (DSM-5), diagnosis of bipolar I depression were randomized to 6 weeks of double-blind treatment with once-daily flexible doses of lurasidone 20-80 mg or placebo. The presence of mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features in this pediatric bipolar depression trial was defined as a Young Mania Rating Scale score of 5 or greater at study baseline. Key efficacy measures included change from baseline to week 6 in the Childrens Depression Rating Scale-Revised (CDRS-R) score (primary endpoint) and Clinical Global Impressions-Bipolar Severity (CGI-BP-S) score, using a mixed model for repeated measures analysis. Results: At baseline, subsyndromal hypomanic features were present in 54.2% of patients. Treatment with lurasidone (vs. placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in CDRS-R scores at week 6, independent of the presence (-21.5 vs. -15.9, p < 0.01; effect size d = 0.43) or absence (-20.5 vs. -14.9, p < 0.01; d = 0.44) of subsyndromal hypomanic features. Likewise, lurasidone (vs. placebo) was associated with significantly greater reductions in CGI-BP-S scores at week 6, independent of the presence (-1.6 vs. -1.1, p < 0.001, d = 0.51) or absence (-1.3 vs. -1.0, p = 0.05; d = 0.31) of these subsyndromal hypomanic features. Rates of protocol-defined treatment-emergent hypomania or mania were similar for lurasidone and placebo in patients with (lurasidone 8.2% vs. placebo 9.0%) or without subsyndromal hypomanic features (lurasidone 1.3% vs. placebo 3.7%). Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis of a randomized placebo-controlled trial, lurasidone was found to be efficacious in the treatment of child and adolescent patients with bipolar depression who presented with mixed (subsyndromal hypomanic) features. No differences in safety profile, including the risk of treatment-emergent mania, were observed in patients with or without subsyndromal hypomanic features in this study.

Drug trials for negative symptoms in schizophrenia select patients based on the severity and stability of negative symptoms, using criteria that are not suitable for trials of acute exacerbation of schizophrenia. Here we present a method to prognostically enrich subjects having a predefined factor structure in PANSS and apply it to the measurement of negative symptoms specifically in trials of acute schizophrenia. A vector of 1335 elements based on between- and within-item variances, covariances, and differences of PANSS items was created to calculate an index of heterogeneity and to enrich for a predetermined symptom construct in PANSS. Using prerandomization PANSS scores across N = 4876 subjects in 13 trials of acute schizophrenia, we demonstrate an ability to select for a subpopulation having the greatest amount of variance explained across the 7-items of the Marder PANSS negative symptom (MPNS) construct. Network analyses on subjects enriched for MPNS construct confirm that negative symptoms were most influential in overall psychopathology, distinct from subjects without the MPNS construct. As expected for D2 antagonists, drug-placebo differences on negative symptoms with lurasidone were not specific to the subpopulation having the MPNS construct. In contrast, the novel TAAR1 agonist ulotaront demonstrated specific improvements in negative symptoms which were greatest in the MPNS subpopulation. These results demonstrate the utility of a novel prognostic enrichment strategy that can address heterogeneity in clinical trials, where patients can be selected on the basis of a greater likelihood of having the measured symptom construct (negative symptoms) related to the disorder (schizophrenia). ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT0296938, NCT00088634, NCT00549718, NCT00615433, NCT00790192.

If treatments for cognitive impairment are to be utilized successfully, clinicians must be able to determine whether they are effective and which patients should receive them. In order to develop consensus on these issues, the International Society for CNS Clinical Trials and Methodology (ISCTM) held a meeting of experts on March 20, 2014, in Washington, DC. Consensus was reached on several important issues. Cognitive impairment and functional disability were viewed as equally important treatment targets. The group supported the notion that sufficient data are not available to exclude patients from available treatments on the basis of age, severity of cognitive impairment, severity of positive symptoms, or the potential to benefit functionally from treatment. The group reached consensus that cognitive remediation is likely to provide substantial benefits in combination with procognitive medications, although a substantial minority believed that medications can be administered without nonpharmacological therapy. There was little consensus on the best methods for assessing cognitive change in clinical practice. Some participants supported the view that performance-based measures are essential for measurement of cognitive change; others pointed to their cost and time requirements as evidence of impracticality. Interview-based measures of cognitive and functional change were viewed as more practical, but lacking validity without informant involvement or frequent contact from clinicians. The lack of consensus on assessment methods was viewed as attributable to differences in experience and education among key stakeholders and significant gaps in available empirical data. Research on the reliability, validity, sensitivity, and practicality of competing methods will facilitate consensus.