SynthesisBMC psychiatry2021
Efficacy and tolerability of atypical antipsychotics for acute bipolar depression: a network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC psychiatry, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 78 citations in OpenAlex.
- Practice Guidelines for Bipolar Disorder by the JSMD (Japanese Society of Mood Disorders).Psychiatry and clinical neurosciences · 2024Guideline
- Efficacy and tolerability of FDA-approved atypical antipsychotics for the treatment of bipolar depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.European psychiatry : the journal of the Association of European Psychiatrists · 2024Pooled it
- Serotonin 1A Receptor Binding of [11C]CUMI-101 in Bipolar Depression Quantified Using Positron Emission Tomography: Relationship to Psychopathology and Antidepressant Response.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2022Trial
- Are People Worse Off in a Mental Health Treatment Paradigm Where Medication Is Deemphasised? A Naturalistic Noninferiority Trial of an Initiative to Improve Patient Choice.The International journal of social psychiatry · 2026Article
- Efficacy and safety of pharmacological and non-invasive brain stimulation for adolescent bipolar depression: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2026Review
- Real-world outcomes of lurasidone augmentation for treatment-resistant bipolar depression: a retrospective observational analysis.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2026Article
- Differentiating Between Major Depressive Disorder and Bipolar Disorder.Advances in experimental medicine and biology · 2026Review
- Rational antipsychotic polypharmacy in psychotic and bipolar disorders: A focus on D2 receptor partial agonists.The mental health clinician · 2025Article
- Lurasidone response in bipolar type I depression with childhood trauma exposure.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Observational
- Antidepressants in the treatment of bipolar depression: commentary.The international journal of neuropsychopharmacology · 2025Review
- Review
- Combining predominant polarity and affective spectrum concepts in bipolar disorder: towards a novel theoretical and clinical perspective.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2024Article
- Psychosis superspectrum II: neurobiology, treatment, and implications.Molecular psychiatry · 2024Review
- Treatment of bipolar depression: clinical practice vs. adherence to guidelines-data from a Bavarian drug surveillance project.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2024Article
- Data-Driven Taxonomy for Antipsychotic Medication: A New Classification System.Biological psychiatry · 2023Article
- NRX-101 (D-cycloserine plus lurasidone) vs. lurasidone for the maintenance of initial stabilization after ketamine in patients with severe bipolar depression with acute suicidal ideation and behavior: a randomized prospective phase 2 trial.International journal of bipolar disorders · 2023Article
- Unmet needs with antipsychotic treatment in schizophrenia and bipolar I disorder: patient perspectives from qualitative focus groups.BMC psychiatry · 2023Article
- Mortality in people with schizophrenia: a systematic review and meta-analysis of relative risk and aggravating or attenuating factors.World psychiatry : official journal of the World Psychiatric Association (WPA) · 2022Article
- A new approach for the treatment of subthreshold bipolar disorders: Targeted high dose levothyroxine and repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation for mitochondrial treatment.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2022Review
- Risk of Drug-induced Movement Disorders with Newer Antipsychotic Agents.Tremor and other hyperkinetic movements (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundWhile clinical trial evidence has firmly established the efficacy of several atypical antipsychotics (AAPs) for treating bipolar depression, no randomized controlled trials (RCT's) comparing AAPs have been conducted. This Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) compared the relative efficacy and tolerability of AAP monotherapy in adults with bipolar depression.
methodsEfficacy measures included change in Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS), Clinical Global Improvement - Bipolar Disorder (CGI-BP), response, and remission. Multiple tolerability outcomes were examined. Results from random effects models were reported as difference in change from baseline for continuous variables or odds ratios for dichotomous variables. Treatments were ranked using the surface under the curve cumulative ranking probabilities. Number needed to treat (NNT) and harm (NNH) were calculated.
resultsEighteen RCT's met inclusion criteria of the systematic literature review. On change in MADRS, lurasidone (- 4.71 [95% Crl - 6.98, - 2.41]), quetiapine (- 4.80 [- 5.93, - 3.72]), olanzapine (- 4.57 [- 5.92, - 3.20]), and cariprazine (- 2.29 [- 3.47, - 1.09]) were more efficacious than placebo. Lurasidone was associated with a significantly greater odds of response (≥50% improvement in MADRS) compared to cariprazine (1.78 [95% Crl 1.08, 2.77]), aripiprazole (2.38 [1.38, 3.85]), and ziprasidone (2.47 [1.41, 3.98]), but was similar to olanzapine (1.68 [0.99,2.65]) and quetiapine (1.25 [0.78, 1.90]). For change in CGI-BP-S-overall score, lurasidone was significantly better than cariprazine (- 0.38 [95% Crl - 0.66,-0.10]) and ziprasidone (- 0.58 [- 0.91,-0.26]), but similar to quetiapine (- 0.08 [- 0.36, 0.19])and olanzapine (- 0.04 [- 1.41, 1.46]). Lurasidone (0.34 kg [95% Crl - 0.22, 0.89]) and aripiprazole (0.20 kg [- 0.59, 1.00]) had a similar weight change compared to placebo, but olanzapine (2.88 kg [2.40, 3.36]), quetiapine (1.17 kg [0.84, 1.49]), and cariprazine (0.65 kg [0.34, 0.96]) were associated with greater weight gain. The NNT for response was the lowest for lurasidone (NNT = 5) followed by quetiapine (NNT = 6), olanzapine (NNT = 10) and cariprazine (NNT = 12).
conclusionsIn this NMA in adults with bipolar depression, which evaluated change in depressive symptoms (assessed by MADRS) across short-term trials, the largest improvement versus placebo was observed for lurasidone, olanzapine and quetiapine with cariprazine, showing a smaller treatment effect. Aripiprazole and ziprasidone were ineffective for the treatment of bipolar depression. Improvement in CGI-BP-S score for lurasidone was larger than cariprazine and ziprasidone but similar to quetiapine and olanzapine. Based on short term studies lurasidone and aripiprazole had similar weight gain compared to placebo.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.