Published in

Public Library of Science, PLoS ONE, 6(8), p. e65636, 2013

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0065636

Links

Tools

Export citation

Search in Google Scholar

Assessment of Response to Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Bipolar Disorder: A Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) Report

Journal article published in 2013 by Mirko Manchia, Mazda Adli, Maria Del Zompo, Nirmala Akula, Raffaella Ardau, Jean-Michel Aubry, Lena Backlund, Claudio Em-M. Banzato, J. Raymond Depaulo, Bernhard T. Baune, Frank Bellivier, Susanne Bengesser, Joanna M. Biernacka, Clara Brichant-Petitjean, Elise Bui and other authors.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.
This paper is made freely available by the publisher.

Full text: Download

Green circle
Preprint: archiving allowed
Upload
Green circle
Postprint: archiving allowed
Upload
Green circle
Published version: archiving allowed
Upload
Policy details
Data provided by SHERPA/RoMEO

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The assessment of response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder (BD) is complicated by variable length of treatment, unpredictable clinical course, and often inconsistent compliance. Prospective and retrospective methods of assessment of lithium response have been proposed in the literature. In this study we report the key phenotypic measures of the "Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder" scale currently used in the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine ConLiGen sites took part in a two-stage case-vignette rating procedure to examine inter-rater agreement [Kappa (k)] and reliability [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)] of lithium response. Annotated first round vignettes and rating guidelines were circulated to expert research clinicians for training purposes between the two stages. Further, we analyzed the distributional properties of the treatment response scores available for 1,308 patients using mixture modeling. RESULTS: Substantial and moderate agreement was shown across sites in the first and second sets of vignettes (k = 0.66 and k = 0.54, respectively), without significant improvement from training. However, definition of response using the A score as a quantitative trait and selecting cases with B criteria of 4 or less showed an improvement between the two stages (ICC1 = 0.71 and ICC2 = 0.75, respectively). Mixture modeling of score distribution indicated three subpopulations (full responders, partial responders, non responders). CONCLUSIONS: We identified two definitions of lithium response, one dichotomous and the other continuous, with moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement and reliability. Accurate phenotypic measurement of lithium response is crucial for the ongoing ConLiGen pharmacogenomic study. ; Mirko Manchia. Bernhard T. Baune. Scott Clark. Oliver K. Schubert. et al. ; Extent: 9 p.