Neuroprotective effect of lithium on hippocampal volumes in bipolar disorder independent of long-term treatment response
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuroimaging studies have demonstrated an association between lithium (Li) treatment and brain structure in human subjects. A crucial unresolved question is whether this association reflects direct neurochemical effects of Li or indirect effects secondary to treatment or prevention of episodes of bipolar disorder (BD). METHOD: To address this knowledge gap, we compared manually traced hippocampal volumes in 37 BD patients with at least 2 years of Li treatment (Li group), 19 BD patients with <3 months of lifetime Li exposure over 2 years ago (non-Li group) and 50 healthy controls. All BD participants were followed prospectively and had at least 10 years of illness and a minimum of five episodes. We established illness course and long-term treatment response to Li using National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) life charts. RESULTS: The non-Li group had smaller hippocampal volumes than the controls or the Li group (F 2,102 = 4.97, p = 0.009). However, the time spent in a mood episode on the current mood stabilizer was more than three times longer in the Li than in the non-Li group (t(51) = 2.00, p = 0.05). Even Li-treated patients with BD episodes while on Li had hippocampal volumes comparable to healthy controls and significantly larger than non-Li patients (t(43) = 2.62, corrected p = 0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support the neuroprotective effects of Li. The association between Li treatment and hippocampal volume seems to be independent of long-term treatment response and occurred even in subjects with episodes of BD while on Li. Consequently, these effects of Li on brain structure may generalize to patients with neuropsychiatric illnesses other than BD.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".