Immunogenetics of lithium response and psychiatric phenotypes in patients with bipolar disorder
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The link between bipolar disorder (BP) and immune dysfunction remains controversial. While epidemiological studies have long suggested an association, recent research has found only limited evidence of such a relationship. To clarify this, we performed an exploratory study of the contributions of immune-relevant genetic factors to the response to lithium (Li) treatment and the clinical presentation of BP. First, we assessed the association of a large collection of immune-related genes (4925) with Li response, defined by the Retrospective Assessment of the Lithium Response Phenotype Scale (Alda scale), and clinical characteristics in patients with BP from the International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLi + Gen, N = 2374). Second, we calculated here previously published polygenic scores (PGSs) for immune-related traits and evaluated their associations with Li response and clinical features. Overall, we observed relatively weak associations ( p < 1 × 10 −4 ) with BP phenotypes within immune-related genes. Network and functional enrichment analyses of the top findings from the association analyses of Li response variables showed an overrepresentation of pathways participating in cell adhesion and intercellular communication. These appeared to converge on the well-known Li-induced inhibition of GSK-3β. Association analyses of age-at-onset, number of mood episodes, and presence of psychosis, substance abuse and/or suicidal ideation suggested modest contributions of genes such as RTN4 , XKR4 , NRXN1 , NRG1/3 and GRK5 to disease characteristics. PGS analyses returned weak associations ( p < 0.05) between inflammation markers and the studied BP phenotypes. Our results suggest a modest relationship between immunity and clinical features in BP. More research is needed to assess the potential therapeutic relevance.
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".