The study examined the prevalence and correlates of heavy smoking and nicotine dependence in adolescents with bipolar and cannabis use disorders. Participants were 80 adolescents between 13 and 22 years of age with co-occurring bipolar I disorder and cannabis abuse or dependence who reported ever trying a cigarette. Diagnostic and symptom severity measures were completed as part of the baseline assessments for a clinical trial. Almost half (49%) of these participants who ever tried a cigarette were current heavy smokers (≥10 cigarettes/day), and 70% met DSM-IV-TR lifetime criteria for nicotine dependence. Heavy smoking was associated with older age, heavier marijuana use and greater compulsive craving, lifetime diagnoses of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, conduct disorder, illicit drug use disorders, and poorer overall functioning. Nicotine dependence was related to White race, higher current mania severity, and poorer overall functioning. These findings suggest that heavy smoking and nicotine dependence were highly prevalent among these adolescents. Although both were associated with greater physical and psychosocial problems, only heavy smoking was linked to a clear pattern of more severe substance-related and psychiatric problems. Further research to elucidate mechanisms and develop interventions to address early, entrenched patterns of co-use of tobacco and marijuana is warranted.

Background

Despite the well-documented negative impact of untreated bipolar illness, approaches to early intervention in childhood-onset bipolar and related disorders are not well delineated.

Methods

We reviewed the extant treatment literature on children at high risk for bipolar disorder, with definitions based on family history, childhood adversity, and prodromal symptoms.

Results

A panoply of approaches have been described, but most interventions are based on an inadequate database to support their routine implementation. We classify early stage interventions as a function of their safety and tolerability with the hope that these might generate more rigorous study and a stronger database.

Limitations

Critics may rightly argue that identifying viable treatment methods is premature given our lack of ability to reliably predict illness trajectory in very young children. However, many of the psychosocial and pharmacological interventions we present could have nonspecific positive effects across a variety of symptoms, syndromes, and diagnoses, further enhancing the rationale for more rigorous study.

Conclusions

Early stage interventions have the potential to improve functioning in prodromal illness and exert long-term positive effects on the course of illness. Many of the safest interventions deserve consideration for implementation and dissemination studies.

Objective

Adolescents with bipolar disorder (BD) are more likely to develop substance use disorders (SUDs) than adolescents without psychiatric disorders; however, to our knowledge, specific risk factors underlying this relationship have not been prospectively examined. The purpose of this study was to identify predictors of developing SUDs after a first manic episode.

Method

Participants aged 12 to 20 years and hospitalized with their first manic episode associated with bipolar I disorder (BP-I) were recruited as part of the University of Cincinnati First-Episode Mania Study and prospectively evaluated for patterns of substance use. Follow-up ranged between 17 and 283 weeks (mean = 113 weeks, SD = 71.9 weeks). Demographic and clinical variables were compared between adolescents with and without SUDs.

Results

Of the 103 adolescents with BD, 49 (48%) either had a SUD at baseline or developed one during follow-up. Of the 71 participants who did not have a SUD at study entry, 17 (24%) developed one during follow-up (median = 40 weeks). Later onset of BD, manic (versus mixed) mood episode, and comorbid disruptive behavior disorders were associated with an increased risk of developing a SUD in univariate analyses. Adolescents treated with psychostimulant treatment before their first manic episode were significantly less likely to develop a SUD independent of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) diagnosis. Comorbid posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) and psychotic symptoms were the strongest predictors of SUD development.

Conclusion

Our results confirm high rates of SUD in adolescents with BD. In addition, our findings identify potential risk factors associated with SUDs in adolescents with BD. These data are preliminary in nature and should be explored further in future studies.

Objective

Previous studies have found that family-focused treatment is an effective adjunct to pharmacotherapy in stabilizing symptoms in adult bipolar disorder. The authors examined whether pharmacotherapy and family-focused treatment for adolescents with bipolar disorder was more effective than pharmacotherapy and brief psychoeducation (enhanced care) in decreasing time to recovery from a mood episode, increasing time to recurrence, and reducing symptom severity over 2 years.

Method

A total of 145 adolescents (mean age, 15.6 years) with bipolar I or II disorder and a DSM-IV-TR manic, hypomanic, depressive, or mixed episode in the previous 3 months were randomly assigned, with family members, either to pharmacotherapy and family-focused treatment, consisting of psychoeducation (i.e., recognition and early intervention with prodromal symptoms), communication enhancement training, and problem-solving skills training, delivered in 21 sessions over 9 months; or to pharmacotherapy and three weekly sessions of enhanced care (family psychoeducation). Independent evaluators assessed participants at baseline, every 3 months during year 1, and every 6 months during year 2, using weekly ratings of mood.

Results

Twenty-two participants (15.2%) withdrew shortly after randomization. Time to recovery or recurrence and proportion of weeks ill did not differ between the two treatment groups. Secondary analyses revealed that participants in family-focused treatment had less severe manic symptoms during year 2 than did those in enhanced care.

Conclusions

After an illness episode, intensive psychotherapy combined with best-practice pharmacotherapy does not appear to confer advantages over brief psychotherapy and pharmacotherapy in hastening recovery or delaying recurrence among adolescents with bipolar disorder.

Antidepressants are standardly used to treat moderate to severe symptoms of depression and/or anxiety in youth but may also be associated with rare but serious psychiatric adverse events such as irritability, agitation, aggression, or suicidal ideation. Adverse events are especially common in youth with a family history of bipolar disorder (BD) who are at heightened risk for dysfunction in neurobiological systems that regulate emotion and arousal. To further understand this phenomenon, this study will examine (a) baseline risk factors associated with dysfunctional arousal in a sample of youth at high-risk for BD treated with or without an antidepressant, (b) whether antidepressant-related changes in arousal are mediated by changes in prefrontal-limbic circuitry, and (c) whether pharmacogenetic factors influence antidepressant-related changes in arousal. High-risk youth (aged 12-17 years with moderate to severe depressive and/or anxiety symptoms and at least one first-degree relative with bipolar I disorder) will be randomized to receive psychotherapy plus escitalopram or psychotherapy plus placebo. Neuroimaging and behavioral measures of arousal will be collected prior to randomization and at 4 weeks. Samples for pharmacogenetic analysis (serum escitalopram concentration, CYP2C19 metabolizer phenotype, and HTR2A and SLC6A4 genotypes) will be collected at 8 weeks. Youth will be followed for up to 16 weeks to assess change in arousal measures.

Objectives

Over the past two decades, there has been tremendous growth in research regarding bipolar disorder (BD) among children and adolescents (ie, pediatric BD [PBD]). The primary purpose of this article is to distill the extant literature, dispel myths or exaggerated assertions in the field, and disseminate clinically relevant findings.

Methods

An international group of experts completed a selective review of the literature, emphasizing areas of consensus, identifying limitations and gaps in the literature, and highlighting future directions to mitigate these gaps.

Results

Substantial, and increasingly international, research has accumulated regarding the phenomenology, differential diagnosis, course, treatment, and neurobiology of PBD. Prior division around the role of irritability and of screening tools in diagnosis has largely abated. Gold-standard pharmacologic trials inform treatment of manic/mixed episodes, whereas fewer data address bipolar depression and maintenance/continuation treatment. Adjunctive psychosocial treatment provides a forum for psychoeducation and targets primarily depressive symptoms. Numerous neurocognitive and neuroimaging studies, and increasing peripheral biomarker studies, largely converge with prior findings from adults with BD.

Conclusions

As data have accumulated and controversy has dissipated, the field has moved past existential questions about PBD toward defining and pursuing pressing clinical and scientific priorities that remain. The overall body of evidence supports the position that perceptions about marked international (US vs elsewhere) and developmental (pediatric vs adult) differences have been overstated, although additional research on these topics is warranted. Traction toward improved outcomes will be supported by continued emphasis on pathophysiology and novel therapeutics.