Psilocybin-Assisted Psychotherapy for Treatment-Resistant Depression in Bipolar II Disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Bipolar II disorder (BD-II) is often associated with chronic and treatment resistant major depressive episodes. Psilocybin has shown promise for its rapid-acting antidepressant effects, though its impact on bipolar depression remains unexplored. In the present subgroup analysis of an already published trial on treatment-resistant depression (TRD), we aimed to preliminarily evaluate the safety and efficacy of psilocybin in patients with BD-II. Methods: Adults with TRD associated with BD-II, excluding those with psychosis were included. Participants underwent one or two psilocybin sessions, each with a dose of 25 mg, along with preparatory and integrative psychotherapy sessions. Results: A total of four participants with a mean age of 37.5 ± 4.15 years were included. At baseline, the mean Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) score was 32.5 (95% CI: 26.3-38.7, SD = 3.87). By week 2 post-dose, mean MADRS decreased to 20.3, and 2 weeks after dose 2, it further dropped to 19. At the end of the 6-month study, the mean MADRS score was 21.3. Young Mania Rating Scale scores remained stable at a mean of one throughout the study with no evidence of treatment emergent mania, hypomania or psychosis observed in any participants. Conclusions: These findings suggest potential improvement in depressive symptoms with psilocybin administration in BD-II. Future studies with larger sample size are required to replicate our results and further evaluate antidepressant effects of psilocybin in bipolar depression.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".