【24h】

Classifying mood disorders by age-at-onset instead of polarity.

机译:按发病年龄而非极性对情绪障碍进行分类。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Polarity is the pillar of the current categorical unipolar-bipolar division of mood disorders. However, genetic studies on these polarity-based phenotypes have been largely inconclusive. Recent clinical and epidemiological studies seem to support more of a continuum than a splitting of mood disorders. A reshaping of the classification of mood disorders thus seems required. Age-at-onset and recurrence have been suggested to be more clinically and genetically useful in the phenotyping of mood disorders. STUDY AIM: To test a classification of mood disorders based on age-at-onset, and to delineate its phenotypes. METHODS: A total of 441 consecutive bipolar II disorder (BP-II) and 289 unipolar major depressive disorder (MDD) outpatients, presenting for treatment of a major depressive episode (MDE) in a clinical and research private practice, were assessed by a mood disorder specialist psychiatrist (FB) using a Structured Clinical Interview for the DSM-IV, modified for better probing past hypomania [Benazzi, F. Bipolar disorder-focus on bipolar II disorder and mixed depression. Lancet 2007a;369: 935-945]. The sample was divided according to age-at-onset. Age-at-onset was defined by the age at onset of the first MDE. Early-age-at-onset (EO) was defined as age at onset before 21 years, late-age-at-onset (LO) as onset at or after age 21 years. The study's current goal had not been planned when data were recorded between 1999 and 2006. Variables were compared in EO versus LO mood disorders, investigating phenotype differences. The main focus was on 'classic' diagnostic validators: MDE clinical picture, gender, course, and family history. Age, gender, BP-II, and mania/hypomania family history (possible confounding) were controlled for in the analyses. Logistic regression was used. RESULTS: First, EO was regressed on each variable, one at a time, to find significant associations. Second, EO was regressed on all of the variables whose odds ratio (OR) was statistically significant in the previous analyses in order to find independent predictors. Independent predictors of EO mood disorder were history of hypomania, high recurrence, atypical depression, and family history of mania/hypomania. Controlling for BP-II (in addition to age and gender) did not impact the findings. The highest OR was that between EO and high recurrence (OR=4.00). Distinguishing MDE symptoms of EO mood disorder included hypersomnia and psychomotor agitation when controlling for age and gender, and, by controlling also for BP-II, hypersomnia only. DISCUSSION: A close association among EO mood disorder, high recurrence, and bipolarity (history of hypomania, family history of mania/hypomania) was found. Compared to most previous studies testing EO versus LO in bipolar (mainly BP-I) or in unipolar MDD samples, the present study tested a mixed BP-II and MDD sample and controlled for polarity, reducing, as much as possible, the impact of polarity on the findings. EO (below age 21 years) was distinguished by hypersomnic depression, highrecurrence, high history of hypomania, and high history of mania/hypomania. Replications are needed, especially in mixed samples also including BP-I. Results, if replicated, could have implications not only for clinical and genetic studies, but also for treatment (e.g., mood stabilizers could have better long-term effects than antidepressants in EO mood disorders, antidepressants could have negative long-term effects on EO).
机译:背景:极性是目前情绪障碍的单极性-双极性分类的支柱。但是,有关这些基于极性的表型的遗传研究在很大程度上尚无定论。最近的临床和流行病学研究似乎更多地支持了连续性,而不是情绪障碍的分裂。因此似乎需要重塑情绪障碍的分类。提示发病年龄和复发在情绪障碍表型的临床和遗传学上更有用。研究目的:测试基于发病年龄的情绪障碍分类,并描述其表型。方法:通过情绪评估了总共441例连续性双相情感障碍II型患者(BP-II)和289例单相情感障碍严重抑郁症(MDD)的门诊患者,这些患者在临床和研究私人诊所中均接受治疗主要抑郁症(MDE)。疾病专家精神病医生(FB)使用了针对DSM-IV的结构化临床访谈,并进行了改进,以更好地探查过去的躁狂症[Benazzi,F.双相情感障碍-专注于双相II型情感障碍和混合性抑郁症。 Lancet 2007a; 369:935-945]。样本根据发病年龄进行划分。发病年龄由第一个MDE发病年龄定义。发病初期(EO)定义为21岁之前的发病年龄,发病后期(LO)定义为21岁或以后的发病年龄。在1999年至2006年间记录数据时,尚未计划该研究的当前目标。比较了EO和LO情绪障碍的变量,调查了表型差异。主要关注点是“经典”诊断验证器:MDE临床图像,性别,病程和家族史。在分析中控制了年龄,性别,BP-II和躁狂/低躁狂家族史(可能混杂)。使用逻辑回归。结果:首先,对每个变量一次回归EO,以找到重要的关联。其次,对所有变量的EO进行回归分析,以找出独立的预测变量,这些变量的比值比(OR)在先前的分析中具有统计学意义。 EO情绪障碍的独立预测因素是低躁狂史,高复发率,非典型抑郁症和躁狂/低躁狂家族史。控制BP-II(除了年龄和性别)不影响研究结果。最高OR是EO和高复发之间的OR(OR = 4.00)。在控制年龄和性别时,区分EO情绪障碍的MDE症状包括失眠和精神运动性躁动,并且通过控制BP-II,仅控制失眠。讨论:发现EO情绪障碍,高复发率和双相性(躁狂症病史,躁狂症/低躁狂症家族史)之间密切​​相关。与以往大多数在双极性(主要是BP-1)或单极性MDD样品中测试EO与LO的研究相比,本研究测试了BP-II和MDD混合样品并控制了极性,从而尽可能降低了调查结果的极性。 EO(21岁以下)的特征是高渗性抑郁症,高复发率,轻躁狂的高病史和躁狂/低躁狂的高病史。需要复制,尤其是在还包括BP-1的混合样本中。结果如果得到复制,不仅会影响临床和遗传研究,还会影响治疗(例如,情绪稳定剂在EO情绪障碍中可能具有比抗抑郁药更好的长期作用,抗抑郁药对EO可能具有负面的长期影响) 。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号