Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-xxrs7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T22:16:26.572Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Impact of depressive episodes on cognitive deficits in early bipolar disorder: data from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Programme for Early Mania (STOP-EM)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Kesavan Muralidharan
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, Britich Columbia, Canada, and Department of Psychiatry, National Institute of Mental Health and Neuro Sciences (NIMHANS), Bangalore, India
Ivan J. Torres
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Leonardo E. Silveira
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and Laboratory of Molecular Psychiatry, Centro de Pesquisas Experimentais, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, and INCT for Translational Medicine, Porto Alegre, and Programa de Pós-GraduaçÃo em Medicina: Psiquiatria, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS, Rua Ramiro Barcelos, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Jan-Marie Kozicky
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Joana Bücker
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, and Laboratory of Molecular Psychiatry, Centro de Pesquisas Experimentais, Hospital de Clínicas de Porto Alegre, and INCT for Translational Medicine, Porto Alegre, and Programa de Pós-GraduaçÃo em Medicina: Psiquiatria, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, UFRGS, Porto Alegre, Brazil
Nadeesha Fernando
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
Lakshmi N. Yatham*
Affiliation:
Mood Disorders Centre, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada
*
Dr Lakshmi N. Yatham, Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, University of British Columbia, Regional Head, Vancouver Coastal Health Authority/Providence Healthcare, 2255 Wesbrook Mall, Vancouver, BC, Canada V6T 2A1. Email: yatham@mail.ubc.ca
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Although manic episodes reportedly contribute to cognitive deficits in bipolar I disorder, the contribution of depressive episodes is poorly researched.

Aims

We investigated the impact of depressive episodes on cognitive function early in the course of bipolar I disorder.

Method

A total of 68 patients and 38 controls from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Programme for Early Mania (STOP-EM) first-episode mania programme were examined. We conducted (a) a cross-sectional analysis of the impact of prior depressive episodes on baseline cognitive function and (b) a prospective analysis assessing the contribution of depression recurrence within 1 year following a first episode of mania on cognitive functioning.

Results

The cross-sectional analysis showed no significant differences between patients with past depressive episodes compared with those without, on overall or individual domains of cognitive function (all P>0.09). The prospective analysis failed to reveal a significant group×time interaction for cognitive decline from baseline to 1 year (P = 0.99) in patients with a recurrence of depressive episodes compared with those with no recurrence. However, impaired verbal memory at baseline was associated with a depression recurrence within 1 year.

Conclusions

Although deficits in all domains of cognitive function are seen in patients early in the course of bipolar disorder, depressive episodes do not confer additional burden on cognitive function. However, poorer verbal memory may serve as a marker for increased susceptibility to depression recurrence early in the course of illness.

Type
Papers
Copyright
Copyright © Royal College of Psychiatrists, 2014 

Neuropsychological deficits have been documented in patients with bipolar I disorder in manic, hypomanic, depressive as well as euthymic phases. Reference Gruber, Rathgeber, Bräunig and Gauggel1,Reference Malhi, Ivanovski, Hadzi-Pavlovic, Mitchell, Vieta and Sachdev2 Deficits in the cognitive domains of verbal memory, executive functions and sustained attention have been consistently reported in remitted bipolar disorder Reference Arts, Jabben, Krabbendam and van Os3-Reference Depp, Mausbach, Harmell, Savla, Bowie and Harvey5 as well as in remitted first-episode mania/bipolar disorder, although the magnitude of impairment is smaller in remitted first-episode mania. Reference Torres, DeFreitas, DeFreitas, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Bond and Honer6,Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7 Although recurrent episodes of mania and depression are the hallmark of bipolar disorder, the impact of mood episodes on cognitive function is poorly researched. Studying mood episodes may help us understand the temporal evolution of cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder, the contribution of mood states to these deficits, and potentially the interaction between neurocognitive deficits and progression of the disorder. Reference Robinson and Ferrier8 Although episodes of illness have been proposed to be more closely associated with cognitive impairment than the total duration of illness, Reference Kessing9 the contribution of the specific type of mood episodes to cognitive deficits, however, has received limited attention. Neuropsychological deficits in the domains of verbal memory, executive function, sustained attention and visual memory are reportedly associated with more lifetime manic episodes. Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7,Reference Robinson and Ferrier8 The relationship of cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder with depressive episodes, however, is less clear. Reference Robinson and Ferrier8 A significant negative correlation between the number of previous depressive episodes and performance on some tests of executive functions, Reference Clark, Iversen and Goodwin10,Reference Zubieta, Huguelet, O'Neil and Giordani11 verbal learning and memory, Reference Deckersbach, Savage, Reilly-Harrington, Clark, Sachs and Rauch12 non-verbal memory Reference Deckersbach, McMurrich, Ogutha, Savage, Sachs and Rauch13 and attention Reference Thompson, Gallagher, Hughes, Watson, Gray and Ferrier14 has been reported in a few retrospective analyses, which are potentially confounded by the effects of age, illness duration, antipsychotic medications and multiple manic episodes. However, many other studies did not find a correlation between depressive episodes and cognition. Reference Cavanagh, van Beck, Muir and Blackwood15-Reference van Gorp, Altshuler, Theberge, Wilkins and Dixon18

Thus, whether depressive episodes contribute to cognitive deficits in bipolar disorder remains unclear. In this study we investigated the relationship between depressive episodes and neuropsychological functioning in a sample of clinically stable patients with bipolar disorder who were within 3 months of recovery from a first episode of mania. Studying a first-episode mania sample would address some of the methodological limitations of earlier studies by overcoming the confounds of age, illness duration, chronicity, effects of medication and multiple manic episodes, thus allowing us to evaluate more directly the impact of depressive episodes on cognitive function. Using a cross-sectional strategy, we compared cognitive functioning in remitted patients with and without a history of depressive episodes. We hypothesised that the former group would show more severe deficits in cognitive functioning compared with patients with first-episode mania without past depressive episodes and healthy controls. In a prospective longitudinal analysis, we also evaluated whether depressive recurrence in the first year after diagnosis would be associated with cognitive decline. We hypothesised that patients with first-episode mania who experience a recurrence of depressive episode within 1 year following the first manic episode would show more cognitive decline than those who did not have a recurrence. Such a finding within the context of a prospective design would provide further support that the recurrent depressive episodes might be causing any observed decline in cognitive functioning

Method

Participants

Cross-sectional analysis

Sixty-eight patients meeting DSM-IV-TR 19 criteria for bipolar I disorder were initially recruited from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Program for Early Mania (STOP-EM) at the University of British Columbia and affiliated sites. Details of the STOP-EM study have been published previously. Reference Yatham, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Bond, Lam and Torres20 Diagnosis of bipolar disorder was established by clinical interview and a Mini International Neuropsychiatric Interview Reference Sheehan, Lecrubier, Sheehan, Amorim, Janavs and Weiller21 (MINI) conducted by a research psychiatrist. Patients who experienced their first manic or mixed episode in the preceding 3 months were enrolled in the study. Those with possible medical or neurological basis for the manic symptoms were excluded. Of the 68 patients recruited, 33 had a history of past depressive episodes (FEMD) and 35 had no history of depressive episodes (FEM). Demographics and clinical characteristics of the sample are summarised in Table 1.

Table 1 Cross-sectional analysis: comparison of sociodemographic and illness variables between the three groups

First-episode
mania
(n = 35)
First-episode mania
with past depression
(n = 33)
Healthy
controls
(n = 38)
F or χ2 P
Age, years: mean (s.d.) 22.5 (4.6) 23.4 (4.1) 23.3 (4.9) F = 0.216 0.81
Female, n (%) 19 (52.8) 18 (51.4) 22 (57.9) χ2 = 0.484 0.76
d.f. = 2
Ethnicity, White, n (%) 26 (81.3) 25 (71.4) 24 (63.2) χ2 = 2.34 0.31
d.f. = 2
Education, years: mean (s.d.) 14.1 (2.1) 14.6 (2.4) 15.0 (2.4) F = 1.54 0.22
Overall age at illness onset, years: mean (s.d.) 22.1 (4.4) 17.3 (5.9) F = 14.165 0.000
Age at mania onset, years: mean (s.d.) 22.5 (4.4) 23.1 (4.1) F = 0.416 0.52
Number of past depressive episodes, mean (s.d.) 2.2 (1.6)
Duration of illness at intake, years: mean (s.d.) 0.3 (1.3) 5.2 (4.9) F = 29.161 0.000
Any history of substance misuse/dependence, n (%) 15 (48.4) 17 (48.6) χ2 = 2.391 0.30
d.f. = 2
Psychotic symptoms in the first manic episode, n (%) 24 (72.7) 24 (70.0) χ2 = 0.038 0.84
d.f. = 1
Medication, n (%)
    Lithium 19 (52.8) 13 (37.1) χ2 = 2.072 0.15
d.f. = 1
    Valproate 12 (34.3) 20 (57.1) χ2 = 3.684 0.06
d.f. = 1
    Mood stabiliser + antipsychotic 24 (68.6) 26 (74.3) χ2 = 0.28 0.59
d.f. = 1
    Antipsychotic 25 (69.4) 26 (74.3) χ2 = 1.296 0.25
d.f. = 1
North American Adult Reading Test for premorbid IQ: mean (s.d.) 107.4 (7.3) 106.2 (7.6) 107.6 (6.6) F = 0.372 0.69
YMRS score, mean (s.d.) 1.1 (1.9) 1.6 (3.6) F = 0.551 0.46
HRSD-29 score mean (s.d.) 4.1 (5.2) 8.6 (8.4) F = 7.435 0.008

HRSD-29, 29-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; YMRS, Young Mania Rating Scale.

Thirty-eight age-, gender-, ethnicity- and premorbid IQ-matched healthy individuals were recruited from the community. Healthy controls were also assessed with MINI. The exclusion criteria included a personal or family history of major psychiatric disorder in first- or second-degree relatives, or major medical or neurological illness affecting cognition.

Prospective analysis

Of the 68 patients included in this study, 48 patients had completed 1-year follow-up. Of these, 3 patients had experienced a manic recurrence and 6 patients had experienced both manic and depressive recurrence in the first year after enrolment, and were thus excluded. The remaining 39 patients were selected for the prospective analysis; of these 39, 24 did not have a recurrence (NR group) and 15 had a depressive episode (DR group) within the first year following enrolment in the study. Demographics and clinical characteristics of the sample are summarised in Table 2.

Table 2 Prospective analysis: comparison of the sociodemographic and illness variables between the two FEM patient groups

FEM no recurrence
(n = 24)
FEM depressed
recurrence (n = 15)
Test P
Age, years: mean (s.d.) 21.7 (3.5) 24.9 (3.8) F = 6.902 0.01
Female, n (%) 13 (54.2) 9 (60) χ2 = 0.128 0.72
d.f. = 1
Ethnicity, n (%)
    White 16 (72.7) 13 (86.7) χ2 = 1.023 0.31
    Other 6 (27.3) 2 (13.3) d.f. = 1
Education, years: mean (s.d.) 13.9 (2.1) 14.7 (1.3) F = 1.768 0.19
Overall age at illness onset, years: mean (s.d.) 18.9 (4.2) 21.4 (5.7) F = 2.318 0.13
Age at mania onset, years: mean (s.d.) 21.6 (3.4) 24.7 (3.8) F = 6.895 0.01
Age at onset of depression, years: mean (s.d.) 16.3 (3.6) 20.7 (6.5) F = 3.483 0.07
Number of past depressive episodes, mean (s.d.) 1.0 (1.5) 1.07 (0.9) F = 0.026 0.87
Duration of illness at intake, years: mean (s.d.) 2.7 (3.4) 3.3 (5.1) F = 0.504 0.6
Any history of substance misuse/dependence, n (%) 9 (39.1) 9 (60) χ2 = 1.586 0.20
d.f. = 1
Medication, n (%)
    Lithium 7 (31.8) 5 (33.3) χ2 = 0.009 0.92
d.f. = 1
    Valproate 11 (50) 7 (46.7) χ2 = 0.040 0.84
d.f. = 1
    Mood stabiliser + antipsychotic 6 (27.3) 10 (66.7) χ2 = 5.639 <0.05
d.f. = 1
    Antipsychotics 7 (31.8) 10 (71.4) χ2 = 5.386 <0.05
d.f. = 1
North American Adult Reading Test for premorbid IQ, mean (s.d.) 106.2 (8.9) 106.9 (6.0) F = 0.077 0.78
YMRS baseline: mean (s.d.) 0.8 (1.6) 2.4 (5.0) F = 2.206 0.14
YMRS year 1: mean (s.d.) 0.5 (1.6) 2.0 (5.7) F = 1.597 0.21
HRSD-29 baseline: mean (s.d.) 5.2 (6.7) 11.2 (10) F = 4.868 0.03
HRSD-29 year 1: mean (s.d.) 1.5 (2.9) 4.4 (5.4) F = 4.332 0.04

FEM, first-episode mania; HRSD-29, 29-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression; YMRS, Young Mania Rating Scale.

The study was approved by the University of British Columbia Clinical Research Ethics Board. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.

Procedures

As part of the larger STOP-EM study, Reference Yatham, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Bond, Lam and Torres20 all patients received a comprehensive baseline clinical evaluation including the MINI, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS), Reference Young, Biggs, Ziegler and Meyer22 29-item Hamilton Rating Scale for Depression (HRSD-29), Reference Williams, Link, Rosenthal and Terman23 Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS), Reference Kay, Fiszbein and Opler24 and the Global Assessment of Functioning Scale (GAF). Reference Endicott, Spitzer, Fleiss and Cohen25 Patients received individualised open-label treatment based on CANMAT guidelines for treatment of bipolar disorder. Reference Yatham, Kennedy, O'Donovan, Parikh, MacQueen and McIntyre26-Reference Yatham, Kennedy, Schaffer, Parikh, Beaulieu and O'Donovan28 All patients recruited into the STOP-EM programme received treatments that were naturalistic and determined by the individual treating psychiatrist: treatments typically consisted of either mood stabiliser monotherapy (lithium or valproate) or combination therapy (mood stabiliser and an atypical antipsychotic) as recommended by CANMAT guidelines. If patients became depressed during the follow-up period, they were typically treated with the addition of lamotrigine or a selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor, or bupropion or quetiapine, if the patient has not already been taking quetiapine. The details of the treatments in both the cross-sectional and prospective analyses are detailed in Tables 1 and 2.

Neuropsychological assessment

Patients were clinically stable at the time of neuropsychological testing, and mean symptom ratings are presented in Table 1. The neuropsychological tests were administered in a quiet room following standard procedures. Subtests from the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery (CANTAB) Reference Robbins, James, Owen, Sahakian, McInnes and Rabbitt29 were selected based on demonstration of their relevance to bipolar disorder. Reference Sweeney, Kmiec and Kupfer30,Reference Olley, Malhi, Bachelor, Cahill, Mitchell and Berk31 The grouping of tasks into cognitive domains was based on the approach taken with the Measurement and Treatment Research to Improve Cognition in Schizophrenia (MATRICS) Cognitive Consensus Battery (MCCB), Reference Nuechterlein, Green, Kern, Baade, Barch and Cohen32 given the overlap of cognitive deficits observed in schizophrenia and bipolar disorder. Reference Yatham, Torres, Malhi, Frangou, Glahn and Bearden33 Moreover, the use of the resulting six MCCB cognitive domains has been shown to have utility in bipolar disorder. Reference Burdick, Goldberg, Cornblatt, Keefe, Gopin and Derosse34 The specific tasks included in each cognitive domain are outlined in the Appendix. For the subset of patients included in the prospective analysis, patients were retested with the same cognitive battery 1 year after the baseline assessment. Practice effects, if present, may have been present in both groups of patients and would unlikely be a major confound.

Appendix Cognitive domains and the neuropsychological tests included in each domain

Cognitive
domain
Neuropsychological tests included
Processing speed Trailmaking Test - time to complete part A
Stroop Test - Word and Color Naming trials, number correct
Letter Fluency - number correct
Attention CANTAB - Rapid Visual Information Processing (RVIP) discriminability score
RVIP latency score
Verbal memory California Verbal Learning Test 2nd edition (CVLT-II) recall trials 1-5
CVLT-II delayed free recall trial
Non-verbal memory CANTAB Spatial Recognition Memory (SRM) per cent correct
CANTAB Pattern Recognition Memory (PRM) per cent correct
CANTAB Paired Associate Learning total errors adjusted score
Working memory Wechsler Memory Scale 3rd edition (WMS-III) (24)
Letter/Number Sequencing
CANTAB Spatial Working Memory (SWM) between errors
Executive function Trailmaking Test B time
Stroop C/W trial, number correct
CANTAB Intra Extra Dimensional (IED) set shifting task number of extra-dimensional shifting (EDS) errors
CANTAB Stockings problems solved in the minimum number of moves

Statistical analysis

Analyses were conducted using SPSS for Windows, Version 20.0 (SPSS Inc, Chicago, Illinois, USA). For analysis of cognitive data, raw scores for each measure were converted to demographics-corrected z-scores based on norms published in accompanying testing manuals. The z-scores for all measures contained within a cognitive domain were averaged to obtain a mean cognitive domain score. Based on prior work, Reference Torres, Kozicky, Popuri, Bond, Honer and Lam35 test-retest reliabilities for domain scores in healthy volunteers were as follows: processing speed, r = 0.93; attention, r = 0.71; verbal memory, r = 0.68; non-verbal memory, r = 0.73; working memory, r = 0.71; and executive functions, r = 0.77.

Cross-sectional analysis

Demographic and clinical variables of the three groups were compared using one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) for continuous variables and chi-squared for categorical variables. Overall performance on the six domains of cognitive function was compared across the three groups using multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA), followed by post hoc Tukey tests to identify between-group differences. Further, the two patient groups were compared using MANCOVA, covarying for potential confounding variables, to identify potential differences in cognitive performance. Bivariate correlational analysis was conducted to assess the correlation between the number of past depressive episodes and neuropsychological performance in the FEMD group.

Prospective analysis

Demographic and clinical variables of the FEM group with no recurrence (NR group) and the FEM group with depression recurrence (DR group) were compared using one-way ANOVA for continuous variables and chi-squared for categorical variables. The change in performance on neurocognitive domains over time was compared between the two groups using repeated measures analysis of variance, with a focus on the group×time interaction. The time and group main effects were also evaluated. Effect sizes were calculated using Cohen’s d.

Results

Cross-sectional analysis

Demographics and clinical characteristics

The three groups - FEM (n = 35), FEMD (n = 33) and healthy controls (n = 38) - were comparable on age, gender, handedness, education, ethnicity, premorbid IQ and age at onset of the first manic episode (all P>0.17). The FEMD group had an average of 2.2 (s.d. = 1.6) depressive episodes prior to the first manic episode. The onset of illness was, as expected, earlier in the FEMD group compared with the FEM group. Of the 33 patients in the FEMD group, only 4 received antidepressants for the prior depressive episode. The FEMD group showed a significantly higher score on the HRSD-29 compared with the FEM group (mean 8.7 (s.d. = 8.4) v. mean 4.1 (s.d. = 5.2); F = 7.4, P<0.05). There was a trend for more patients in the FEMD group to be treated with valproate than in the FEM group (χ2 = 3.7; P = 0.055). A comparison of the demographic and clinical variables is provided in Table 1.

Neurocognitive domains

On MANOVA, there was a significant group effect on overall cognitive functioning (Wilks lambda = 0.758, F = 2.430, P = 0.006). On individual cognitive domains, there was a significant difference between the three groups on five of the six domains (P<0.05), and there was a trend for significance in the domain of processing speed (P = 0.08). On post hoc pair-wise comparison of between-group differences, both FEM and FEMD groups performed significantly poorer than healthy controls on domains of verbal memory, non-verbal memory, working memory and executive function. Only the FEMD group and not the FEM group had significantly poorer performance on tests of attention (P = 0.024) compared with healthy controls. However, there was no significant difference between the two patient groups in attention (t = 0.983; P = 0.32) The results are shown in Table 3.

Table 3 Cross-sectional analysis: comparison of performance on cognitive domains between the three groups, using multivariate analysis of variance

FEMD
(n = 33)
Mean (s.d.)
FEM
(n = 35)
Mean (s.d.)
HC
(n = 38)
Mean (s.d.)
F d.f. P Post hoc Tukey
Processing speed −0.49 (0.50) −0.40 (0.75) −0.13 (0.79) 2.510 2 0.09
Attention −0.31 (0.90) −0.10 (0.84) 0.17 (0.73) 3.196 2 0.045Footnote * FEMD<HCFootnote **
Verbal memory −0.26 (1.16) −0.24 (1.01) 0.60 (0.91) 8.446 2 0.000Footnote * FEM & FEMD<HC
Non-verbal memory −0.16 (0.59) −0.32 (0.91) 0.36 (0.46) 5.901 2 0.004Footnote * FEM & FEMD<HC
Working memory −0.46 (0.96) −0.09 (0.87) 0.40 (0.69) 8.141 2 0.001Footnote * FEM & FEMD<HC
Executive functions −0.15 (0.67) −0.14 (0.79) 0.36 (0.66) 6.203 2 0.003Footnote * FEM & FEMD<HC

FEM, first-episode mania without depression; FEMD, FEM with past depression; HC, healthy controls.

* P<0.05

** Differences between FEMD and HC (but not FEM and HC) showed statistical significance (P = 0.03).

To directly test the hypothesis of poorer cognitive function in the FEMD group relative to the FEM group, the two groups were compared using MANOVA to test for overall differences in cognitive functions. There was no significant difference between the two groups (Wilks lambda = 0.924; F = 0.842; P = 0.54). Also, there was no difference between the two groups on individual domains of neurocognitive functioning (all P>0.09). Effect size differences between the two patient groups on individual cognitive domains were as follows: processing speed, d = 0.01; attention, d = 0.21; verbal memory, d = –0.06; non-verbal memory, d = 0.1; working memory, d = 0.37; and executive functions, d = –0.01.

The two patient groups were further compared using MANCOVA, covarying for HRSD-29 scores and treatment with valproate, as there was a significant difference between the two groups on these variables and hence, they may have confounded the potential impact on cognitive functioning. However, as in the first analysis, there was no difference between the FEM and FEMD groups on overall performance in cognitive functions (Wilks lambda = 0.925, F = 0.779, P = 0.59) or on individual domains of cognitive function (all P>0.2). Excluding the four patients on treatment with antidepressants in the FEMD group also showed no difference between the FEM and FEMD groups on overall (Wilk’s lambda = 0.932, F= 0.639, P= 0.69) or individual domains of cognitive functioning (all P>0.2).

On bivariate correlation analysis, there was no correlation between the number of past depressive episodes and performance on any of the neurocognitive domains in the FEMD group. The Spearman correlation coefficients between number of depressive episodes and respective cognitive domains were: processing speed, r = –0.09, P = 0.63; attention, r = 0.10, P = 0.95; verbal memory, r = –0.16, P= 0.35; non-verbal memory, r= 0.11, P= 0.51; working memory, r= –0.05, P= 0.78; and executive functions, r= –0.25, P = 0.15. We also did not find any correlation between the duration of illness and performance on cognitive domains in the FEMD group (all P>0.24).

Prospective analysis

Demographics and clinical characteristics

The two FEM groups - NR group (n = 24) and DR group (n = 15) - were comparable on gender (χ2 = 0.128; P = 0.72), education (P = 0.19), ethnicity (White; χ2 = 1.023; P = 0.31), premorbid IQ (P = 0.82) and on the number of depressive episodes prior to the first manic episode (P = 0.89). Eleven patients from the FEMD group in the cross-sectional analysis were part of the DR group in the prospective analysis.

The NR group was slightly, although significantly, younger than the DR group (mean 21.8 years (s.d. = 3.6) v. mean 24.9 years (s.d. = 3.8); F = 6.902, P<0.05) and had a younger age at onset of mania (P<0.05) and depression (P = 0.07). The DR group had significantly higher scores on HRSD-29 at baseline (P<0.05) and at 1 year (P<0.05) compared with the NR group. There was no difference between the two groups on treatment with lithium (P = 0.26) or valproate (P = 0.47). Significantly more patients in the DR group were on treatment with antipsychotics and a combination of antipsychotics and mood stabilisers than in the NR group. A summary of demographic and clinical variables is provided in Table 2.

Neurocognitive domains

Regarding the overall group main effect, there was no significant difference between the NR and DR groups on overall performance on neurocognitive tests (Wilks lambda = 0.774; F = 1.510; P = 0.20). Univariate tests of the group main effect, however, revealed a difference between the two groups on verbal memory (F = 6.861, P = 0.01), with the DR group showing poorer verbal memory compared with the NR group and a trend for significance on tests of non-verbal memory (P = 0.06).

There was a significant overall time effect (Wilks lambda = 0.306; F = 11.706 and P<0.001) and univariate tests revealed a significant time effect on all cognitive domains except non-verbal memory (P = 0.11). However, there was no significant group×time interaction observed on overall neurocognitive functioning (Wilks lambda = 0.975; F = 0.130 and P = 0.99) or individual cognitive domains (all P>0.50). The neuropsychological results are shown in Table 4.

Table 4 Prospective analysis: comparison of performance on cognitive domains from baseline to 1 year between the two first-episode mania (FEM) patient groups, using repeated measures analysis of variance

FEM no recurrence,
mean (s.d.)
FEM depression recurrence,
mean (s.d.)
F Group main
effect baseline,
effect size
Group main
effect year 1,
effect size
Baseline Year 1 Baseline Year 1 Group Time Time×group
Processing speed −0.58 (0.63) −0.09 (0.63) −0.58 (0.65) −0.20 (0.59) 0.089 22.357Footnote ** 0.540 0.00 0.11
Attention −0.03 (0.90) 0.47 (0.94) −0.31 (0.65) 0.31 (0.65) 0.695 26.178Footnote ** 0.593 0.28 0.16
Verbal memory 0.03 (0.93) 0.69 (1.06) −0.78 (1.20) −0.15 (1.04) 6.861Footnote * 18.393Footnote ** 0.931 0.81 0.84
Non-verbal memory 0.12 (0.77) 0.39 (0.69) −0.32 (0.68) −0.10 (1.29) 3.668 2.679 0.856 0.44 0.49
Working memory −0.21 (0.81) 0.22 (0.78) −0.37 (1.09) 0.12 (0.74) 0.236 16.038Footnote ** 0.793 0.16 0.10
Executive function −0.19 (0.62) 0.38 (0.65) −0.31 (0.87) 0.21 (0.55) 0.449 37.080Footnote ** 0.794 0.12 0.17

* P<0.05

** P<0.001; Trend for significance.

Since the two groups were significantly different on HRSD scores both at baseline and at year 1, the potential confound of depressive symptoms was examined by comparing the groups using MANOVA with repeated measures controlling for HRSD-29 scores at baseline and year 1 separately. There was no significant group×time effect after controlling for HRSD-29 scores at baseline, on overall (Wilks lambda = 0.850; F = 0.881; P = 0.52) or individual domains of cognitive functioning (all P>0.60); similar results were obtained after controlling for HRSD-29 scores at year 1, both on overall (Wilks lambda = 0.960; F = 0.209; P = 0.97) and performance on individual cognitive domains (all P>0.39). Importantly, the univariate tests of the group main effect continued to show poorer verbal memory in the DR group compared with the NR group, both after controlling for HRSD-29 scores at baseline (F = 6.454; P<0.05) and at a trend level at 1 year (F = 3.835; P = 0.06).

Discussion

Main findings

This study represents one of the first attempts at investigating the contribution of depressive episode(s) to cognitive impairment in patients who are early in the course of bipolar disorder. A major strength of this study is the inclusion of both a cross-sectional and prospective analysis within the methodology, which allowed us to study the contribution of depressive episodes to cognitive deficits before and after a first episode of mania. The main findings of this study are that (a) in early bipolar disorder, following recovery from a first manic episode, past depressive episodes do not appear to have a substantial impact on cognitive deficits, and (b) recurrence of a depressive episode within the first year after diagnosis of bipolar disorder is not associated with further cognitive decline. We did, however, find that verbal memory deficit at baseline was associated with depression recurrence within the first year following a diagnosis of bipolar disorder.

Deficits in sustained attention, Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7,Reference Nehra, Chakrabarti, Pradhan and Khehra36 processing speed, Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7,Reference Gruber, Rosso and Yurgelun-Todd37 learning and memory, Reference Torres, DeFreitas, DeFreitas, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Bond and Honer6 working memory and executive function Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7 have been reported in first-episode bipolar disorder compared with healthy individuals. Our findings of impaired performance in both the patient groups vis-à-vis the healthy controls in almost all domains of cognitive functioning are consistent with other studies reporting cognitive deficits in early bipolar disorder. Based on the existing literature, Reference Torres, DeFreitas, DeFreitas, Kauer-Sant'Anna, Bond and Honer6,Reference Hellvin, Sundet, Simonsen, Aminoff, Lagerberg and Andreassen7 it is possible that cognitive deficits in early bipolar disorder, immediately after recovery from a first manic episode, are likely determined by the first manic episode and not depressive episodes.

We did not, however, find any significant difference between the two patient groups on overall or individual domains of cognitive function in our cross-sectional analysis. On tests of attention, the FEMD group performed poorly compared with the FEM group, although the difference was non-significant and the effect size was small (0.21). A meta-analysis of cognitive deficits in patients with remitted first-episode major depressive disorder and young patients with remitted major depressive disorder reported deficits in sustained attention relative to healthy controls. Reference Lee, Hermens, Porter and Redoblado-Hodge38,Reference Wekking, Bockting, Koeter and Schene39 It has been suggested that much like major depressive disorder, past depression may contribute to attention deficits in early bipolar disorder. Reference Bora, Yucel and Pantelis40 Even though we did not find this in the current sample, it is possible that with more depressive episodes, these differences on attention tasks may become more apparent. Reference Kessing9,Reference Hasselbalch, Knorr, Hasselbalch, Gade and Kessing41

The prospective analysis did not reveal any further impact of depression recurrence in the first year after bipolar disorder diagnosis to the existing cognitive deficits at baseline. A study has suggested that cumulative duration of depressive episodes may be associated with more cognitive dysfunction in major depressive disorder. Reference Hasselbalch, Knorr, Hasselbalch, Gade and Kessing41 An association between multiple depressive episodes and greater global cognitive decline has been reported previously, with no differences between unipolar depression and bipolar disorder. Reference Kessing9 Wekking et al highlight that cumulative deterioration in cognitive functioning after each new depressive episode has been poorly studied Reference Wekking, Bockting, Koeter and Schene39 since the idea was first proposed by Kessing in 1998. The current study which controlled for a number of confounds and used a prospective cohort design to assess the potential causative impact of depressive episodes does not suggest that depressive episodes in bipolar disorder have significant deleterious effects on cognitive function at least in the early stage of the disorder.

Even though depressive recurrence did not associate with further cognitive decline, the DR group showed evidence of poorer verbal memory at baseline and at year 1 compared with the NR group. It is thus possible that impaired verbal memory may serve as a trait marker that makes patients more susceptible to depressive recurrence early in the course of illness, even though depressive recurrence per se may not cause cognitive decline early in the illness.

The possible link between verbal memory and depression is also apparent when underlying brain substrates are considered. For example, verbal learning and memory have been correlated with hippocampal volume in various neuropsychiatric disorders. Reference MacQueen and Frodl42 The hippocampus is a regulator of prefrontal cortical function Reference Gurden, Tassin and Jay43 and deficits in hippocampal functioning have been associated with attention and memory deficits observed in depression. Reference MacQueen and Frodl42 Smaller hippocampal volume has been associated with more than one depressive episode Reference McKinnon, Yucel, Nazarov and MacQueen44 and has been documented to predict future depressive episodes in high-risk studies in major depressive disorder. Reference Rao, Chen, Bidesi, Shad, Thomas and Hammen45 Although the association between depression and smaller hippocampal volumes has been well documented, the relationship between bipolar disorder and hippocampal volume is less clear from structural imaging studies. Reference Frey, Andreazza, Nery, Martins, Quevedo and Soares46 One study reported that smaller hippocampal volumes were correlated with poor performance on tests of verbal memory in bipolar disorder Reference Chepenik, Wang, Spencer, Spann, Kalmar and Womer47 compared with healthy individuals, but no information was provided on the impact of depressive episodes to this finding. There is also evidence of abnormal hippocampal activation during performance of attention and memory encoding tasks in bipolar disorder from functional magnetic resonance imaging studies. Reference Frey, Andreazza, Nery, Martins, Quevedo and Soares46 Based on the poorer performance in the domain of verbal memory by the DR group vis-à-vis the NR group, and the recurrence of a depressive episode within 1 year of bipolar disorder onset, we can only speculate that the DR group may have had more impaired hippocampal functioning relative to the NR group. The number of depressive episodes in our sample was much lower than those cited in the meta-analysis by McKinnon et al. Reference McKinnon, Yucel, Nazarov and MacQueen44 Although our data suggest that depressive episodes do not appear to contribute to cognitive deficits early in the course of illness, we cannot rule out the possibility that further depressive episodes may occur with illness progression and could contribute to more deficits in hippocampus functioning and cognitive decline subsequently, as reported in the McKinnon study. However, imaging studies comparing these two groups, in drug-naive conditions, are required before such a hypothesis can be tested.

Deficits in verbal memory have been reportedly associated with other clinical features such as longer duration of illness and more manic episodes. Reference Robinson and Ferrier8 However, we were not able to study a similar association with manic recurrence because of the small number of patients with manic recurrence in our sample. Deficits in verbal memory have been reported both in patients with remitted bipolar disorder and in their first-degree relatives. Gourovitch et al reported deficits in verbal memory but not working memory in unaffected monozygotic twins discordant for bipolar disorder compared with unaffected control monozygotic twins; Reference Gourovitch, Torrey, Gold, Randolph, Weinberger and Goldberg48 another study reported similar findings in siblings of patients with bipolar disorder and schizophrenia relative to controls. Reference Kéri, Kelemen, Benedek and Janka49 Robinson & Ferrier reported significant impairments in verbal memory and executive function in patients with bipolar disorder and modest impairments in their first-degree relatives. Reference Robinson and Ferrier8 This was reflected in the meta-analysis by Arts et al, who found large impairments in patients and intermediate impairments in first-degree relatives on tasks of executive function and verbal memory. Reference Arts, Jabben, Krabbendam and van Os3 Another review on relatives of patients with bipolar disorder concluded that verbal learning and memory is the most likely candidate for a neurocognitive endophenotype for bipolar disorder. Reference Balanzá-Martínez, Rubio, Selva-Vera, Martinez-Aran, Sánchez-Moreno and Salazar-Fraile50 A meta-analysis by Bora et al reported similar findings, Reference Bora, Yucel and Pantelis40 although the effect sizes in first-degree relatives were modest. In our prospective analysis, greater verbal memory deficits were observed in the DR group. In light of the above literature, it can be hypothesised that verbal memory deficits may represent a cognitive endophenotype of bipolar disorder, which may confer a greater risk of recurrence of a depressive episode within the first year of a first manic episode in bipolar disorder. However, the absence of premorbid memory testing limits the inferences that we can draw from this particular finding.

Strengths

The study has several strengths. It is a first attempt to examine the impact of past depression on cognitive deficits in early bipolar disorder. It is also the first to prospectively study the impact of new depressive episodes on existing cognitive deficits in early bipolar disorder. Prior manic episodes have served as a major confound in previous studies in bipolar disorder attempting to link depressive episodes to neuropsychological deficits, which we were able to overcome. Although the FEMD group had an earlier age at onset, it was a function of the inclusion criteria and we did not find any correlations between the duration of illness and performance on cognitive functions in this group. The potential confounding effect of current medications on cognitive performance was also controlled.

Limitations

Some limitations with the present study need to be mentioned. The FEMD and DR groups had more depressive symptoms on HRSD-29 than the FEM and NR groups respectively. Although this was controlled statistically, the potential influence of depressive symptomatology on performance cannot be ruled out completely. Reference Hasselbalch, Knorr and Kessing51 The FEMD group also had more patients on valproate, which was also controlled for statistically as valproate is documented to have a possible negative impact on cognitive functions. Reference Dias, Balanzá-Martinez, Soeiro-de-Souza, Moreno, Figueira and Machado-Vieira52 While assessing the impact of depressive episodes on neurocognitive dysfunction, we did not study the severity, duration and the presence of psychotic symptoms in the depressive episodes independently which have been shown to influence cognitive functions associated with depression. Reference Hasselbalch, Knorr, Hasselbalch, Gade and Kessing41 The reason is that a large majority of our patients had a history of psychosis. Another limitation is that we only examined the impact of number of depressive episodes and not the duration of episode, which may also be an important variable to investigate. Further, as very few patients in the FEMD group had received prior treatment with antidepressants; the impact of treatment with antidepressants on cognitive function could not be assessed, although excluding those patients who received treatment with antidepressants did not change the results of our analysis.

Although the sample size in this study was modest, it is not likely that this factor had a major impact on findings. For example, the effect sizes for the group differences in cognitive functioning in the cross-sectional analysis were generally small: processing speed, d = 0.01; attention, d = 0.21; verbal memory, d = –0.06; non-verbal memory, d = 0.1; working memory, d = 0.37; and executive functions, d = –0.01. Considering the largest effect (d = 0.37), a sample size of approximately 115 per group would have been necessary to detect a difference of that magnitude with power of 0.8. Thus, a considerably larger sample size would have been necessary to detect an effect of that magnitude.

Clinical implications

In conclusion, although deficits in all domains of cognitive function are observed in patients early in the course of bipolar disorder, the additional burden and impact of depressive episodes in the early stages is not significant. Despite this, presence of poorer verbal memory may serve as a marker for increased susceptibility to depressive recurrence early in the course of bipolar disorder.

Funding

STOP-EM is supported by an unrestricted grant from AstraZeneca.

Footnotes

Declaration of interest

L.N.Y. has received research grants from or is a speaker/on advisory boards for AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments, Eli Lilly & Co, Forest, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Lundbeck, Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research, Novartis, Otsuka, Pfizer, Ranbaxy, Servier, and the Stanley Foundation. J.B. and L.E.S. have received a scholarship from Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Brazil.

References

1 Gruber, S, Rathgeber, K, Bräunig, P, Gauggel, S. Stability and course of neuropsychological deficits in manic and depressed bipolar patients compared to patients with major depression. J Affect Disord 2007; 104: 6171.Google Scholar
2 Malhi, GS, Ivanovski, B, Hadzi-Pavlovic, D, Mitchell, PB, Vieta, E, Sachdev, P. Neuropsychological deficits and functional impairment in bipolar depression, hypomania and euthymia. Bipolar Disord 2007; 9: 114–25.Google Scholar
3 Arts, B, Jabben, N, Krabbendam, L, van Os, J. Meta-analyses of cognitive functioning in euthymic bipolar patients and their first-degree relatives. Psychol Med 2008; 38: 771–85.Google Scholar
4 Torres, IJ, Boudreau, VG, Yatham, LN. Neuropsychological functioning in euthymic bipolar disorder: a meta-analysis. Acta Psychiatr Scand Suppl 2007; 116: 1726.Google Scholar
5 Depp, C, Mausbach, BT, Harmell, AL, Savla, GN, Bowie, CR, Harvey, PD, et al. Meta-analysis of the association between cognitive abilities and everyday functioning in bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2012; 14: 217–26.Google Scholar
6 Torres, IJ, DeFreitas, VG, DeFreitas, CM, Kauer-Sant'Anna, M, Bond, DJ, Honer, WG, et al. Neurocognitive functioning in patients with bipolar I disorder recently recovered from a first manic episode. J Clin Psychiatry 2010; 71: 1234–42.Google Scholar
7 Hellvin, T, Sundet, K, Simonsen, C, Aminoff, SR, Lagerberg, TV, Andreassen, OA, et al. Neurocognitive functioning in patients recently diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2012; 14: 227–38.Google Scholar
8 Robinson, LJ, Ferrier, IN. Evolution of cognitive impairment in bipolar disorder: a systematic review of cross-sectional evidence. Bipolar Disord 2006; 8: 103–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
9 Kessing, LV. Cognitive impairment in the euthymic phase of affective disorder. Psychol Med 1998; 28: 1027–38.Google Scholar
10 Clark, L, Iversen, SD, Goodwin, GM. Sustained attention deficit in bipolar disorder. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 180: 313–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
11 Zubieta, JK, Huguelet, P, O'Neil, RL, Giordani, BJ. Cognitive function in euthymic bipolar I disorder. Psychiatry Res 2001; 102: 920.Google Scholar
12 Deckersbach, T, Savage, CR, Reilly-Harrington, N, Clark, L, Sachs, G, Rauch, SL. Episodic memory impairment in bipolar disorder and obsessive-compulsive disorder: the role of memory strategies. Bipolar Disord 2004; 6: 233–44.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
13 Deckersbach, T, McMurrich, S, Ogutha, J, Savage, CR, Sachs, G, Rauch, SL. Characteristics of non-verbal memory impairment in bipolar disorder: the role of encoding strategies. Psychol Med 2004; 34: 823–32.Google Scholar
14 Thompson, JM, Gallagher, P, Hughes, JH, Watson, S, Gray, JM, Ferrier, IN, et al. Neurocognitive impairment in euthymic patients with bipolar affective disorder. Br J Psychiatry 2005; 186: 3240.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
15 Cavanagh, JTO, van Beck, M, Muir, W, Blackwood, DHR. Case–control study of neurocognitive function in euthymic patients with bipolar disorder: an association with mania. Br J Psychiatry 2002; 180: 320–6.Google Scholar
16 Martínez-Arán, A, Vieta, E, Colom, F, Torrent, C, Sánchez-Moreno, J, Reinares, M, et al. Cognitive impairment in euthymic bipolar patients: implications for clinical and functional outcome. Bipolar Disord 2004; 6: 224–32.Google Scholar
17 Rubinsztein, JS, Michael, A, Paykel, ES, Sahakian, BJ. Cognitive impairment in remission in bipolar affective disorder. Psychol Med 2000; 30: 1025–36.Google Scholar
18 van Gorp, WG, Altshuler, L, Theberge, DC, Wilkins, J, Dixon, W. Cognitive impairment in euthymic bipolar patients with and without prior alcohol dependence. A preliminary study. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1998; 55: 41–6.Google Scholar
19 American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (4th edn, Text Revision) (DSM-IV-TR). APA, 2000.Google Scholar
20 Yatham, LN, Kauer-Sant'Anna, M, Bond, DJ, Lam, RW, Torres, I. Course and outcome after the first manic episode in patients with bipolar disorder: prospective 12-month data from the Systematic Treatment Optimization Program For Early Mania project. Can J Psychiatry 2009; 54: 105–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
21 Sheehan, DV, Lecrubier, Y, Sheehan, KH, Amorim, P, Janavs, J, Weiller, E, et al. The mini-international neuropsychiatric interview (M.I.N.I.): The development and validation of a structured diagnostic psychiatric interview for DSM-IV and ICD-10. J Clin Psychiatry 1998; 59 (suppl 20): 2233.Google Scholar
22 Young, RC, Biggs, JT, Ziegler, VE, Meyer, DA. A rating scale for mania: reliability, validity and sensitivity. Br J Psychiatry 1978; 133: 429–35.Google Scholar
23 Williams, JBW, Link, MJ, Rosenthal, NE, Terman, M. Structured Interview Guide for the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale, Seasonal Affective Disorders Version (SIGH-SAD). New York State Psychiatric Institute, 1988.Google Scholar
24 Kay, SR, Fiszbein, A, Opler, LA. The positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS) for schizophrenia. Schizophr Bull 1987; 13: 261–76.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
25 Endicott, J, Spitzer, RL, Fleiss, JL, Cohen, J. The Global Assessment Scale. A procedure for measuring overall severity of psychiatric disturbance. Arch Gen Psychiatry 1979; 33: 6671.Google Scholar
26 Yatham, LN, Kennedy, SH, O'Donovan, C, Parikh, S, MacQueen, G, McIntyre, R, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: consensus and controversies. Bipolar Disord 2005; 7 (suppl 3): 569.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
27 Yatham, LN, Kennedy, SH, O'Donovan, C, Parikh, SV, MacQueen, G, McIntyre, RS, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2007. Bipolar Disord 2006; 8: 721–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
28 Yatham, LN, Kennedy, SH, Schaffer, A, Parikh, SV, Beaulieu, S, O'Donovan, C, et al. Canadian Network for Mood and Anxiety Treatments (CANMAT) and International Society for Bipolar Disord (ISBD) collaborative update of CANMAT guidelines for the management of patients with bipolar disorder: update 2009. Bipolar Disord 2009; 11: 225–55.Google Scholar
29 Robbins, TW, James, M, Owen, AM, Sahakian, BJ, McInnes, L, Rabbitt, P. Cambridge neuropsychological test automated battery (CANTAB): a factor analytic study of a large sample of normal elderly volunteers. Dementia 1994; 5: 266–81.Google ScholarPubMed
30 Sweeney, JA, Kmiec, JA, Kupfer, DJ. Neuropsychologic impairments in bipolar and unipolar mood disorders on the CANTAB neurocognitive battery. Biol Psychiatry 2000; 48: 674–84.Google Scholar
31 Olley, AL, Malhi, GS, Bachelor, J, Cahill, CM, Mitchell, PB, Berk, M. Executive functioning and theory of mind in euthymic bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2005; 7 (suppl 5): 4352.Google Scholar
32 Nuechterlein, KH, Green, MF, Kern, RS, Baade, LE, Barch, DM, Cohen, JD, et al. The MATRICS consensus cognitive battery, part 1: Test selection, reliability, and validity. Am J Psychiatry 2008; 165: 203–13.Google Scholar
33 Yatham, LN, Torres, IJ, Malhi, GS, Frangou, S, Glahn, DC, Bearden, CE, et al. The International Society for Bipolar Disord-Battery for Assessment of Neurocognition (ISBD-BANC). Bipolar Disord 2010; 12: 351–63.Google Scholar
34 Burdick, KE, Goldberg, TE, Cornblatt, BA, Keefe, RS, Gopin, CB, Derosse, P, et al. The MATRICS consensus cognitive battery in patients with bipolar I disorder. Neuropsychopharmacology 2011; 36: 1587–92.Google Scholar
35 Torres, IJ, Kozicky, J, Popuri, S, Bond, DJ, Honer, WG, Lam, RW, et al. 12-month longitudinal cognitive functioning in patients recently diagnosed with bipolar disorder. Bipolar Disord 2013; 25 Nov, epub ahead of print.Google Scholar
36 Nehra, R, Chakrabarti, S, Pradhan, BK, Khehra, N. Comparison of cognitive functions between first- and multi-episode bipolar affective disorders. J Affect Disord 2006; 93: 185–92.Google Scholar
37 Gruber, SA, Rosso, IM, Yurgelun-Todd, D. Neuropsychological performance predicts clinical recovery in bipolar patients. J Affect Disord 2008; 105: 253–60.Google Scholar
38 Lee, RSC, Hermens, DF, Porter, M, Redoblado-Hodge, MA. A meta-analysis of cognitive deficits in first-episode major depressive disorder. J Affect Disord 2012; 140: 113–24.Google Scholar
39 Wekking, EM, Bockting, CLH, Koeter, MWJ, Schene, AH. Cognitive functioning in euthymic recurrently depressed patients: relationship with future relapses and prior course of disease. J Affect Disord 2012; 141: 300–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
40 Bora, E, Yucel, M, Pantelis, C. Cognitive endophenotypes of bipolar disorder: a meta-analysis of neuropsychological deficits in euthymic patients and their first-degree relatives. J Affect Disord 2009; 113: 120.Google Scholar
41 Hasselbalch, BJ, Knorr, U, Hasselbalch, SG, Gade, A, Kessing, LV. The cumulative load of depressive illness is associated with cognitive function in the remitted state of unipolar depressive disorder. Eur Psychiatry 2012; 28: 349–55.Google Scholar
42 MacQueen, G, Frodl, T. The hippocampus in major depression: evidence for the convergence of the bench and bedside in psychiatric research? Mol Psychiatry 2011; 16: 252–64.Google Scholar
43 Gurden, H, Tassin, JP, Jay, TM. Integrity of the mesocortical dopaminergic system is necessary for complete expression of in vivo hippocampal-prefrontal cortex long-term potentiation. Neuroscience 1999; 94: 1019–27.Google Scholar
44 McKinnon, MC, Yucel, K, Nazarov, A, MacQueen, GM. A meta-analysis examining clinical predictors of hippocampal volume in patients with major depressive disorder. J Psychiatry Neurosci 2009; 34: 4154.Google Scholar
45 Rao, U, Chen, LA, Bidesi, AS, Shad, MU, Thomas, MA, Hammen, CL. Hippocampal changes associated with early-life adversity and vulnerability to depression. Biol Psychiatry 2010; 67: 357–64.Google Scholar
46 Frey, BN, Andreazza, AC, Nery, FG, Martins, MR, Quevedo, J, Soares, JC, et al. The role of hippocampus in the pathophysiology of bipolar disorder. Behav Pharmacol 2007; 18: 419–30.Google Scholar
47 Chepenik, LG, Wang, F, Spencer, L, Spann, M, Kalmar, JH, Womer, F, et al. Structure-function associations in hippocampus in bipolar disorder. Biol Psychol 2012; 90: 1822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
48 Gourovitch, ML, Torrey, EF, Gold, JM, Randolph, C, Weinberger, DR, Goldberg, TE. Neuropsychological performance of monozygotic twins discordant for bipolar disorder. Biol Psychiatry 1999; 45: 639–46.Google Scholar
49 Kéri, S, Kelemen, O, Benedek, G, Janka, Z. Different trait markers for schizophrenia and bipolar disorder: a neurocognitive approach. Psychol Med 2001; 31: 915–22.Google Scholar
50 Balanzá-Martínez, V, Rubio, C, Selva-Vera, G, Martinez-Aran, A, Sánchez-Moreno, J, Salazar-Fraile, J, et al. Neurocognitive endophenotypes (endophenocognitypes) from studies of relatives of bipolar disorder subjects: a systematic review. Neurosci Biobehav Rev 2008; 32: 1426–38.Google Scholar
51 Hasselbalch, BJ, Knorr, U, Kessing, LV. Cognitive impairment in the remitted state of unipolar depressive disorder: a systematic review. J Affect Disord 2011; 134: 2031.Google Scholar
52 Dias, VV, Balanzá-Martinez, V, Soeiro-de-Souza, MG, Moreno, RA, Figueira, ML, Machado-Vieira, R, et al. Pharmacological approaches in bipolar disorder and the impact on cognition: a critical overview. Acta Psychiatr Scand 2012; 126: 315–31.Google Scholar
Figure 0

Table 1 Cross-sectional analysis: comparison of sociodemographic and illness variables between the three groups

Figure 1

Table 2 Prospective analysis: comparison of the sociodemographic and illness variables between the two FEM patient groups

Figure 2

Appendix Cognitive domains and the neuropsychological tests included in each domain

Figure 3

Table 3 Cross-sectional analysis: comparison of performance on cognitive domains between the three groups, using multivariate analysis of variance

Figure 4

Table 4 Prospective analysis: comparison of performance on cognitive domains from baseline to 1 year between the two first-episode mania (FEM) patient groups, using repeated measures analysis of variance

Submit a response

eLetters

No eLetters have been published for this article.