Absolute and Relative Risks of Kidney Outcomes Associated With Lithium vs Valproate Use in Sweden
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Importance: Among patients with bipolar disorder, discordant findings have been published on the nephrotoxic effects of lithium therapy. Objective: To quantify absolute and relative risks of chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression and acute kidney injury (AKI) in people who initiated lithium compared with valproate therapy and to investigate the association between cumulative use and elevated lithium levels and kidney outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study had a new-user active-comparator design and used inverse probability of treatment weights to minimize confounding. Included patients initiated therapy with lithium or valproate from January 1, 2007, to December 31, 2018, and had a median follow-up of 4.5 years (IQR, 1.9-8.0 years). Data analysis began in September 2021, using routine health care data from the period 2006 to 2019 from the Stockholm Creatinine Measurements project, a recurrent health care use cohort of all adult residents in Stockholm, Sweden. Exposures: New use of lithium vs new use of valproate and high (>1.0 mmol/L) vs low serum lithium levels. Main Outcomes and Measures: Progression of CKD (composite of >30% decrease relative to baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] and kidney failure), AKI (by diagnosis or transient creatinine elevations), new albuminuria, and annual eGFR decrease. Outcomes by attained lithium levels were also compared in lithium users. Results: The study included 10 946 people (median [IQR] age, 45 [32-59] years; 6227 female [56.9%]), of whom 5308 initiated lithium therapy and 5638 valproate therapy. During follow-up, 421 CKD progression events and 770 AKI events were identified. Compared with patients who received valproate, those who received lithium did not have increased risk of CKD (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.86-1.45]) or AKI (HR, 0.88 [95% CI, 0.70-1.10]). Absolute 10-year CKD risks were low and similar: 8.4% in the lithium group and 8.2% in the valproate group. No difference in the risk of developing albuminuria or the annual rate of eGFR decrease was found between groups. Among more than 35 000 routine lithium tests, only 3% of results were in the toxic range (>1.0 mmol/L). Lithium values greater than 1.0 mmol/L, compared with lithium values of 1.0 mmol/L or less, were associated with increased risk of CKD progression (HR, 2.86; 95% CI, 0.97-8.45) and AKI (HR, 3.51; 95% CI, 1.41-8.76). Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, compared with new use of valproate, new use of lithium was meaningfully associated with adverse kidney outcomes, with low absolute risks that did not differ between therapies. However, elevated serum lithium levels were associated with future kidney risks, particularly AKI, emphasizing the need for close monitoring and lithium dose adjustment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».