Association of polygenic score and the involvement of cholinergic and glutamatergic pathways with lithium treatment response in patients with bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Lithium is regarded as the first-line treatment for bipolar disorder (BD), a severe and disabling mental health disorder that affects about 1% of the population worldwide. Nevertheless, lithium is not consistently effective, with only 30% of patients showing a favorable response to treatment. To provide personalized treatment options for bipolar patients, it is essential to identify prediction biomarkers such as polygenic scores. In this study, we developed a polygenic score for lithium treatment response (Li + PGS ) in patients with BD. To gain further insights into lithium’s possible molecular mechanism of action, we performed a genome-wide gene-based analysis. Using polygenic score modeling, via methods incorporating Bayesian regression and continuous shrinkage priors, Li + PGS was developed in the International Consortium of Lithium Genetics cohort (ConLi + Gen: N = 2367) and replicated in the combined PsyCourse ( N = 89) and BipoLife ( N = 102) studies. The associations of Li + PGS and lithium treatment response — defined in a continuous ALDA scale and a categorical outcome (good response vs. poor response) were tested using regression models, each adjusted for the covariates: age, sex, and the first four genetic principal components. Statistical significance was determined at P < 0.05. Li + PGS was positively associated with lithium treatment response in the ConLi + Gen cohort, in both the categorical ( P = 9.8 × 10 − 12 , R 2 = 1.9%) and continuous ( P = 6.4 × 10 − 9 , R 2 = 2.6%) outcomes. Compared to bipolar patients in the 1 st decile of the risk distribution, individuals in the 10 th decile had 3.47-fold (95%CI: 2.22–5.47) higher odds of responding favorably to lithium. The results were replicated in the independent cohorts for the categorical treatment outcome ( P = 3.9 × 10 − 4 , R 2 = 0.9%), but not for the continuous outcome ( P = 0.13). Gene-based analyses revealed 36 candidate genes that are enriched in biological pathways controlled by glutamate and acetylcholine. Li + PGS may be useful in the development of pharmacogenomic testing strategies by enabling a classification of bipolar patients according to their response to treatment.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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".