OBJECTIVES: The Retrospective Assessment of the Lithium Response Phenotype Scale (Alda scale) is the most widely used clinical measure of lithium response phenotypes. We assess its performance against recommended psychometric and clinimetric standards. METHODS: We used data from the Consortium for Lithium Genetics and a French study of lithium response phenotypes (combined sample >2500) to assess reproducibility, responsiveness, validity, and interpretability of the A scale (assessing change in illness activity), the B scale, and its items (assessing confounders of response) and the previously established response categories derived from the Total Score for the Alda scale. RESULTS: The key findings are that the B scale is vulnerable to error measurement. For example, some items contribute little to overall performance of the Alda scale (eg, B2) and that the B scale does not reliably assess a single construct (uncertainty in response). Machine learning models indicate that it may be more useful to employ an algorithm for combining the ratings of individual B items in a sequence that clarifies the noise to signal ratio instead of using a composite score. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights three important topics. First, empirical approaches can help determine which aspects of the performance of any scale can be improved. Second, the B scale of the Alda is best applied as a multidimensional index (identifying several independent confounders of the assessment of response). Third, an integrated science approach to precision psychiatry is vital, otherwise phenotypic misclassifications will undermine the reliability and validity of findings from genetics and biomarker studies.

Département de Psychiatrie et de Médecine Addictologique AP HP GH Saint Louis Lariboisière F Widal Paris France

Department of Pharmacology Dalhousie University Halifax NS Canada

Department of Psychiatry Dalhousie University Halifax NS Canada

EPS Maison Blanche Paris France

Institute of Neuroscience Newcastle University Newcastle UK

Institute of Psychiatric Phenomics and Genomics University Hospital LMU Munich Munich Germany

National Institute of Mental Health Klecany Czech Republic

Section of Psychiatry Department of Medical Sciences and Public Health University of Cagliari Cagliari Italy

Université Paris Diderot and INSERM UMRS1144 Paris France

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Bellivier F, Marie-Claire C. Lithium response variability: new avenues and hypotheses. In: Malhi G, Masson M, Bellivier F, eds. The Science and Practice of Lithium Therapy. London, UK: Springer;2017:23-35.

Machado-Vieira R, Luckenbaugh DA, Soeiro-de-Souza MG, et al. Early improvement with lithium in classic mania and its association with later response. J Affect Disord. 2013;144(1-2):160-164.

Scott J, Etain B, Bellivier F. Can an integrated science approach to precision medicine research improve lithium treatment in bipolar disorders? Front Psychiatry;2018;9:1-10.

Perlis RH, Smoller JW, Ferreira M, et al. A genome-wide association study of response to lithium for prevention of recurrence in bipolar disorder. Am J Psychiatry. 2009;166:718-725.

Oedegaard KJ, Alda M, Anand A, et al. The Pharmacogenomics of Bipolar Disorder study (PGBD): identification of genes for lithium response in a prospective sample. BMC Psychiatry. 2016;16:129.

Response to Lithium Network: R-LiNK (C.I.: F. Bellivier, Paris). https://rlink.eu.com. Accessed December 1st, 2018.

Song J, Bergen S, Di Florio A, et al. Genome-wide association study identifies SESTD1 as a novel risk gene for lithium-responsive bipolar disorder. Mol Psychiatry. 2016;21(9):1290-1297.

Coppen A, Peet M, Bailey J, et al. Double-blind and open prospective studies of lithium prophylaxis in affective disorders. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry. 1973;76:501-510.

Maj M, Arena F, Lovero N, Pirozzi R, Kemali D. Factors associated with response to lithium prophylaxis in DSM III major depression and bipolar disorder. Pharmacopsychiatry. 1985;18(5):309-313.

Grof P, Duffy A, Cavazzoni P, et al. Is response to prophylactic lithium a familial trait? J Clin Psychiatry. 2002;63:942-947.

Scott J, Geoffroy P, Sportiche S, et al. Cross-validation of clinical characteristics and treatment patterns associated with phenotypes for lithium response defined by the Alda scale. J Affect Disord. 2017;208:62-67.

Hou L, Heilbronner U, Degenhardt F, et al. Genetic variants associated with response to lithium treatment in bipolar disorder: a genome-wide association study. Lancet. 2016;387:1085-1093.

Lee M, Chen CH, Lee CS, et al. Genome-wide association study of bipolar I disorder in the Han Chinese population. Mol Psychiatry. 2011;16:548-556.

Chen C, Lee C, Chen H, et al. GADL1 variant and medication adherence in predicting response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar I disorder. BJPsych Open. 2016;2:301-306.

Manchia M, Adli M, Akula N, et al. Assessment of response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder: a Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) report. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:e65636.

Tighe S, Ritchey M, Schweizer B, et al. Test-retest reliability of a new questionnaire for the retrospective assessment of long-term lithium use in bipolar disorder. J Affect Disord. 2015;15(174):589-593.

Schulze T, Alda M, Adli M, et al. The International Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen): an initiative by the NIMH and IGSLI to study the genetic basis of response to lithium. Neuropsychobiology. 2010;62:72-78.

Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Katz JN, Wright JG. A taxonomy for responsiveness. J Clin Epidemiol. 2001;54(12):1204-1217.

de Vet H, Terwee C, Knol D, Bouter L. When to use agreement versus reliability measures. J Clin Epidemiol. 2006;59:1033-1039.

Fayers P. Hand D Causal variables, indicator variables and measurement scales: an example of quality of life. J R Stat Soc. 2002;165:233-261.

An FA. additional basic science for clinical medicine: IV. The development of clinimetrics. Ann Intern Med. 1983;99(6):843-848.

Husted JA, Cook RJ, Farewell VT, Gladman DD. Methods for assessing responsiveness: a critical review and recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2000;53(5):459-468.

Kottner J, Audige L, Brorson S, et al. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64(1):96-106.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34-42.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res. 2012;21(4):651-657.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;18(10):22.

Sportiche S, Geoffroy P, Brichant-PetitJean C, et al. Clinical factors associated with lithium response in bipolar disorders. Aust N Z J Psychiatry. 2017;51(5):524-530.

Clinimetrics FA. Chapter 6: The theory and evaluation of sensibility. Westford, MA: Murray;1987:141-166.

Marx R, Bombardier C, Hogg-Johnson S, Wright J. Clinimetric and psychometric strategies for the development of a health measurement scale. J Clin Epidemiol. 1999;52:105-111.

Kramer M, Feinstein A. The biostatistics of concordance. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 1981;29:111-123.

Tavakol M, Dennick R. Making sense of Cronbach's alpha. Int J Med Educ. 2011;2:53-55.

Neuendorf K. The Content Analysis Guidebook. 2nd edition. London, UK: Sage Publications; 2016:23-61.

Lawley D, Maxwell A. Factor analysis as a statistical method. J R Stat Soc. 1962;12(3):209-229.

Yaghmale F. Content validity and its estimation. J Med Edu. 2003;3(1):25-27.

Epskamp S, Maris G, Waldorp L, Borsboom D. Network psychometrics. In: Irwing P, Hughes D, Booth T, eds. Handbook of Psychometrics. New York: Wiley; 2018:1-17.

Epskamp S, Fried E. A tutorial on regularized partial correlation networks. Psychol Methods. 2018;48(4):1-18.

Loh W, Chen C, Hordle W, Unwin A. Improving the precision of classification trees. Ann Appl Stat. 2009;3:1710-1737.

Kass GV. An exploratory technique for investigating large quantities of categorical data. Appl Stat. 1980;29:119-127.

Garnham J, Munro A, Slaney C, et al. Prophylactic treatment response in bipolar disorder: results of a naturalistic observation study. J Affect Disord. 2007;104:185-190.

Hui TP, Kandola A, Shen L, et al. A systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical predictors of lithium response in bipolar disorder. Acta Psychiatr Scand. 2019;140(2):94-115.

Fava G, Tomba E, Sonino N. Clinimetrics: the science of clinical measurements. Int J Clin Pract. 2012;66(1):11-15.

Howes OD, McCutcheon R, Agid O, et al. Treatment-resistant schizophrenia: treatment response and resistance in psychosis (TRRIP) working group consensus guidelines on diagnosis and terminology. Am J Psychiatry. 2017;174(3):216-229.

Scott J.Barriers to optimising benefits of lithium- reliability and utility of response scales and clinical strategies for recognizing the efficacy-effectiveness gap. Session 15, 31st ECNP Conference, Barcelona, Spain, October 6-9, 2018. European Neuropsychopharmacology, Supplement. 2018 November, In press.

Buyske S, Yang G, Matise TC, Gordon D. When a case is not a case: effects of phenotype misclassification on power and sample size requirements for the transmission disequilibrium test. Hum Hered. 2009;67:287-292.

Fava G, Guidi J, Grandi S, Hasler G. The missing link between clinical states and biomarkers in mental disorders. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83(3):136-141.

Association of polygenic score and the involvement of cholinergic and glutamatergic pathways with lithium treatment response in patients with bipolar disorder

Association of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder and Depression Polygenic Scores with Lithium Response: A Consortium for Lithium Genetics Study

Combining schizophrenia and depression polygenic risk scores improves the genetic prediction of lithium response in bipolar disorder patients