Methodological issues in developing new acute treatments for patients with bipolar illness

One important aim of the recent reorganization of the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) is to streamline the development of new treatments for patients with severe mental illnesses, such as bipolar disorder. Researching new treatments for patients with bipolar disorder presents specific problems not readily addressed by traditional efficacy trial methodologies that aim to maximize internal validity. This article reexamines several assumptions that have guided the design of these efficacy trials but that also create obstacles for studies of bipolar disorder and suggests potential solutions. This article draws on literature from neurology and psychiatry and discussions at a MacArthur Foundation–sponsored Conference on Longitudinal Methodology in 1992 (David J. Kupfer, M.D., Chair), which brought together investigators to consider alternative designs for patients with severe and persistent mental illness. In addition, we benefited from discussions at two NIMH-sponsored conferences, one held in 1989 (Prien and Potter 1990) and the other in 1994 (Prien and Rush 1996), at which investigators and methodologists discussed issues surrounding the development and conduct of informative efficacy trials for patients with bipolar disorder. Based on these discussions and recent literature reviews, we 1) outline common problems in the development and evaluation of effective acute treatments for bipolar disorder and 2) suggest possible solutions to these impediments. We also discuss alternative designs by which to build a sequence of acute treatment studies from which efficacy, safety, and the comparative value of different treatments can be established.