CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 35Bipolar Disorder and TreatmentSchizophrenia research and treatmentTreatment of Major Depression

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 113 of the 113 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Biological predictors of lithium response in bipolar disorder

Open access
Ikeda, Akifumi, Kato, Tadafumi·2003·Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
DOI 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003.01112.x
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract In order to prescribe lithium appropriately to patients with bipolar disorder, predictors of lithium response are helpful. The present paper reviews the biological predictors of lithium response. As a positive predictor of lithium response, the following have been reported: strong loudness dependence of the auditory‐evoked N1/P2‐response; higher brain lithium concentration; lower inositol monophosphatase (IMPase) mRNA expression; higher serotonin‐induced calcium mobilization; increased N‐acetyl‐aspartate peak and decreased myo‐inositol peak; white matter hyperintensity; decreased intracellular pH; higher frequency of phospholipase C γ‐1 (PLCG1)‐5 repeat and PLCG1‐8 repeat; and C973A polymorphism in the inositol polyphosphate 1‐phosphatase gene. In contrast the following have been reported as a predictor of negative lithium response: epileptiform abnormality of electroencephalography; human leukocyte antigen type A3; decreased phosphocreatine peak area after photic stimulation; and homozygotes for the short variant of the serotonin transporter gene. Most of the possible biological predictors of better lithium response, such as lower IMPase mRNA levels, white matter hyperintensity, lower brain intracellular pH, enhanced calcium response, and PLCG1‐5 repeat had been detected as risk factors for bipolar disorder, suggesting that bipolar disorder responding well to maintenance lithium treatment is a distinct category having a certain neurobiological basis, although these findings need further replication. The search for biological predictors of lithium response is still in its infancy. Most of the laboratory or neuroimaging techniques used in these studies are not easily performed in clinical settings, so the development of an easy and useful laboratory test is needed.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003.01112.x

Cites

113 of 113 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Berridge MJ, 1989, Inositol trisphosphate, calcium, lithium, and cell signaling, JAMA, 262, 1834, 10.1001/jama.1989.03430130110043 · DOI
  2. Del Zompo M, 1999, Lithium response: Association study with two candidate genes, Mol. Psychiatry, 4, S66

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Metadata

Authors
Ikeda, A., & Kato, T.
Affiliations
  • The University of Tokyo (JP)
  • RIKEN Center for Brain Science (JP)
ORCID
Kato, Tadafumi
Venue
Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2003-05-02
Volume
57
Issue
3
Pages
243-250
ISSN
  • 1323-1316 (ISSN-L)
  • 1440-1819
DOI
10.1046/j.1440-1819.2003.01112.x
OpenAlex
W1988239052
Cited by
35
References
113
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 3
FWCI
0.41
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor (vor)
Locations
  • Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Bipolar Disorder and Treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pharmacology (medical) › Treatment of Major Depression
Keywords
lithium response, bipolar disorder, biological predictors, inositol monophosphatase, N-acetylaspartate, myo-inositol, white matter hyperintensities, intracellular pH, phospholipase C-gamma1, serotonin transporter, human leukocyte antigen, epileptiform EEG abnormalities, photic stimulation, neuroimaging biomarkers
MeSH terms
Bipolar Disorder, Brain, Calcium, Electroencephalography, Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Genetic Markers, Humans, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Phosphoric Monoester Hydrolases, Predictive Value of Tests, Prognosis, RNA, Messenger, Biomarkers, Lithium Carbonate, Antimanic Agents

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review