The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of psychoeducation in serum levels of BDNF, NGF and GDNF in young adults presenting bipolar disorder (BD). This is a randomized clinical trial including 39 young adults (18–29 years) diagnosed with BD through the Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-IV (SCID-CV). Participants were randomized in two treatment groups: usual treatment (medication) and combined intervention (medication plus psychoeducation). Depressive symptoms were assessed using the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale (HDRS) and severity of manic and hypomanic symptoms was evaluated through the Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS). The serum levels of trophic factors were measured with an ELISA kit. In both intervention groups, there was an improvement in depressive symptoms significantly between baseline and post-intervention. In the combined intervention, GDNF serum levels increased significantly from baseline to post-intervention. However, there were no differences in BDNF and NGF serum levels. In the usual treatment group, no changes were observed in serum levels of GDNF, BDNF, and NGF the post-intervention in individuals. Our data suggests that only combined intervention was effective in improving depressive symptoms and increasing GDNF levels in a sample of young adults with bipolar disorder.

Previous studies exploring mental time travel paradigms with functional neuroimaging techniques have uncovered both common and distinct neural correlates of re-experiencing past events or pre-experiencing future events. A gap in the mental time travel literature exists, as paradigms have not explored the affective component of re-experiencing past episodic events; this study explored this sparsely researched area. The present study employed standardized low resolution electromagnetic tomography (sLORETA) to identify electrophysiological correlates of re-experience affect-laden and non-affective past events, as well as pre-experiencing a future anticipated event. Our results confirm previous research and are also novel in that we illustrate common and distinct electrophysiological correlates of re-experiencing affective episodic events. Furthermore, research from this experiment yields results outlining a pattern of activation in the frontal and temporal regions is correlated with the time frame of past or future events subjects imagined.

This method describes the simultaneous determination of amisulpride, amitriptyline, aripiprazole, benperidol, chlorpromazine, chlorprothixene, citalopram, clomipramine, clozapine, desipramine, doxepin, fluoxetine, flupentixol, fluphenazine, fluvoxamine, haloperidol, hydroxyrisperidone, imipramine, levomepromazine, maprotiline, mianserine, mirtazapine, moclobemide, norclomipramine, nordoxepin, norfluoxetine, nortriptyline, O-desmethylvenlafaxine, olanzapine, opipramol, paroxetine, perazine, perphenazine, pimozide, pipamperone, quetiapine, reboxetine, risperidone, sertraline, sulpiride, thioridazine, trazodone, trimipramine, venlafaxine, viloxazine, ziprasidone, zotepine and zuclopenthixol with a single sample/triple injection approach. Drugs were assigned to subgroups covering low, medium and high concentrations (overall range of therapeutic levels to be considered: 0.5–2000 ng/mL) by further dilution of the supernatant obtained after the first protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was necessary for isobaric mass fragments and performed on a monolithic C18 column (50 mm × 4.6 mm) with methanol gradient and 5 mM acetate buffer at pH 3.9. The injection interval was 8 min. A set of three internal standards was used for quantification of drugs with widely varying hydrophobicity. After electrospray ionization positive ion fragments were detected in the multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) mode with an API 4000 tandem mass spectrometer. Regression parameters of calibration curves and limits of quantification showed good covering of therapeutic and subtherapeutic ranges with an average correlation coefficient of 0.9988. Imprecision and inaccuracy measures were prepared for intra- and inter-assay comparisons at three concentration ranges in all subgroups. Average coefficients of variation were 6.1% for intra-assay and 7.4% for inter-assay comparisons, while average deviations from spiked concentrations were 4.8% for intra-assay and 4.2% for inter-assay comparisons, respectively. Recovery rates, measured as the percent recoveries of spiked serum samples against standard solutions without serum matrix, varied between 92 and 111%, with an average of 101%. As the only exception, the olanzapine response was much higher (185%) in serum matrix than in matrix-free controls.