Journal of affective disorders · 2026
Efficacy, acceptability, and related outcomes of pharmacological interventions for acute bipolar depression: A systematic review and dose-related network meta-analysis across different age groups.
СтатьяNetwork Meta-AnalysisСистематический обзорНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fornaro Michele, Di Lorenzo Chiara, Oliva Vincenzo, De Prisco Michele, Vieta Eduard
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Acute bipolar depression poses a significant burden and socioeconomic costs. We investigated the comparative efficacy/response/acceptability of pharmacological interventions for acute bipolar depression, considering dose effects across different age groups.
METHODS: We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA), searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological interventions against each other/or placebo in patients with acute bipolar depression (Type-I/Type-II/other), indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web-of-Science/and Scopus (database inception up to 2025.11.25). Co-primary outcomes were change in depressive symptoms/response/and acceptability. Tolerability/remission/change in anxious symptoms/and risk-of-manic/hypomanic switches were secondary outcomes. Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis was likewise appraised.
RESULTS: 103 RCTs, encompassing 71 distinct treatment combinations, included 20,941 participants. Sensitivity analysis including low-risk-of-bias studies only and excluding outliers for possible effect modifiers indicated that lamotrigine 50 mg/day or 200 mg/day, quetiapine extended-release 150 mg/day and 300 mg/day, and lumateperone 42 mg/day outperformed placebo for depressive symptoms, with estimates ranging from -1.53(95%C.I. = -2.13;-0.93) for lamotrigine 50 mg/day, to -0.36(95%C.I. = -0.68;-0.04) for lumateperone 42 mg/day. Several additional drugs might be efficacious, although they emerged as outliers for either mean age of participants/proportion of females/BD-II participants/psychotic features/rapid cycling/baseline severity of depression/and trial duration. No treatment outperformed placebo for response/remission/acceptability/tolerability/and manic/hypomanic switches.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with previous NMAs and current guidelines, thereby expanding knowledge by concurrently appraising different drugs, doses, and age groups.
METHODS: We conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA), searching for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing pharmacological interventions against each other/or placebo in patients with acute bipolar depression (Type-I/Type-II/other), indexed in PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Web-of-Science/and Scopus (database inception up to 2025.11.25). Co-primary outcomes were change in depressive symptoms/response/and acceptability. Tolerability/remission/change in anxious symptoms/and risk-of-manic/hypomanic switches were secondary outcomes. Confidence-In-Network-Meta-Analysis was likewise appraised.
RESULTS: 103 RCTs, encompassing 71 distinct treatment combinations, included 20,941 participants. Sensitivity analysis including low-risk-of-bias studies only and excluding outliers for possible effect modifiers indicated that lamotrigine 50 mg/day or 200 mg/day, quetiapine extended-release 150 mg/day and 300 mg/day, and lumateperone 42 mg/day outperformed placebo for depressive symptoms, with estimates ranging from -1.53(95%C.I. = -2.13;-0.93) for lamotrigine 50 mg/day, to -0.36(95%C.I. = -0.68;-0.04) for lumateperone 42 mg/day. Several additional drugs might be efficacious, although they emerged as outliers for either mean age of participants/proportion of females/BD-II participants/psychotic features/rapid cycling/baseline severity of depression/and trial duration. No treatment outperformed placebo for response/remission/acceptability/tolerability/and manic/hypomanic switches.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings are consistent with previous NMAs and current guidelines, thereby expanding knowledge by concurrently appraising different drugs, doses, and age groups.