Lithium and valproate protect against dextro-amphetamine induced brain choline concentration changes in bipolar disorder patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Lithium may affect brain choline concentrations, and this effect has been proposed to potentially explain its clinical efficacy. Since dextro-amphetamine is a useful human model of mania, we were interested in determining firstly whether dextro-amphetamine would alter brain choline concentrations, and secondly to determine if lithium would protect against any such changes in bipolar patients. In addition, we wanted to determine if valproate would also have any effects upon choline levels. METHODS: Healthy controls (n=18) were compared with euthymic Bipolar Disorder patients (Type I and Type II) who were taking lithium (n=14) or valproate (n=11). We utilized (1)H-magnetic resonance spectroscopy ((1)H-MRS) in a 3.0T scanner to examine brain choline/phosphocholine+creatine (Cho/Cr) ratios. Changes in this ratio were measured to determine any changes in choline concentrations in the temporal lobe. RESULTS: The results showed that administration of dextro-amphetamine decreased the Cho/Cr ratios. In contrast, in both the lithium-treated and valproate-treated patients this decrease was not seen; this attenuation in the change in Cho/Cr ratio changes was statistically significant. It should be noted that Cho/Cr ratios were significantly higher at baseline in the controls compared to both groups of patients, which may have influenced the results. CONCLUSIONS: These findings are the first to examine the effects of dextro-amphetamine on brain choline concentrations. They show that while in controls dextro-amphetamine decreases choline concentrations, lithium and valproate both appear to protect against this effect in bipolar patients. However, as brain ratios were measured rather than the absolute concentration of choline, and these ratios were lowered in patients at baseline, these results must be regarded as preliminary and require replication in future studies.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".