Explore the vast range of titles available.

Background Lithium is a well-established treatment for bipolar I disorder in adults. However, there is a paucity of information on its pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics in children and adolescents. We aimed to develop the first lithium dosage regimens based on population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics for paediatric patients. Methods Lithium concentrations, Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) and Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement (CGI-I) scores over 24 weeks were available from 61 paediatric patients with bipolar I disorder. The population pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics were co-modelled. Concentrations and clinical effects following several dosage regimens were predicted by Monte Carlo simulations. Results The pharmacokinetics were well characterised by a two compartment model with linear elimination. Including the effect of total body weight (TBW) or lean body weight (LBW) on clearance and volume of distribution decreased the unexplained inter-individual variability by up to 12 %. The population mean (inter-individual variability) clearance was 1.64 L/h/53 kg LBW 0.75 (19 %) and central volume of distribution 23.6 L/53 kg LBW (6.8 %). The average lithium concentration over a dosing interval required for a 50 % reduction in YMRS was 0.711 mEq/L (59 %). A maintenance dose of 25 mg/kg TBW/day lithium carbonate in two daily doses was predicted to achieve a ≥50 % reduction in YMRS in 74 % of patients, while ~8 % of patients would be expected to have trough concentrations above the nominal safety threshold of 1.4 mEq/L. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring will still be required even with these dosing strategies. Conclusions When accounting for body size, the pharmacokinetic parameters in paediatric patients were within the range of estimates from adults. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling supported development of practical scientifically-based dosage regimens for paediatric patients.

Objective Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a frequent and serious side effect of many cytotoxic drugs, including paclitaxel. Despite the identification of treatment options in animal models, clinical trials for the treatment or prevention of CIPN have been negative. Major challenges for successful clinical translation of preclinical data include a lack of reproducibility and randomization, small sample sizes and insufficient statistical tests. We therefore conducted a confirmatory, preclinical multicenter randomized controlled replication trial to test the safety and efficacy of three drugs for preventing paclitaxel-induced polyneuropathy: (1) nilotinib, (2) lithium carbonate and (3) interleukin-6-neutralizing antibodies. We preregistered the data analysis plan as well as the two-step study protocol: the optimal doses of the three compounds were assessed first and then tested in a mouse breast cancer xenograft model to compare safety and efficacy. Results Unfortunately, toxicity of intraperitoneally administered nilotinib in combination with paclitaxel was observed, and higher-than-expected tumor growth resulted in a lack of power when the trial was analyzed. Thus, although lithium carbonate and IL-6-neutralizing antibodies tended toward neuroprotection, the differences between these groups were not statistically significant. However, the PINPRICS study ultimately still provides important lessons with regard to the planning and conduction of multicenter preclinical trials.

Spinocerebellar ataxia type 2 (SCA2) is an autosomal dominant disorder. Lithium is able to stimulate autophagy, and to reduce Ca 2+ efflux from the inositol-1,4,5-triphosphate receptor. We designed a phase II, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, 48-week trial with lithium carbonate in 20 patients with SCA2. The primary objective was to determine safety and tolerability of lithium. The secondary objectives were to determine disease progression, quality of life, mood, and brain volume change. Sixteen patients completed the trial, 8 randomized to lithium, 8 to placebo. Forty adverse events (AEs) were reported during the trial, twenty-eight in the lithium and 12 in the placebo group ( p  = 0.11). Mean AE duration was 57.4 ± 60.8 and 77.4 ± 68.5 days ( p  = 0.37). Non-significant differences were observed for the SARA and for brain volume change, whereas a significant reduction in the BDI-II was observed for lithium group ( p  < 0.05). Lithium was well tolerated and reported AEs were similar to those previously described for bipolar disorder patients. A correctly powered phase III trial is needed to assess if lithium may slow disease progression in SCA2.

Study design: Lithium has attracted much attention as a neuroregenerative agent for spinal cord injury in animal models. We hypothesized that the lithium can be beneficial to patients with spinal cord injury. The safety and pharmacokinetics of lithium has been studied in our earlier phase I clinical trial, indicating its safety. This is a phase II clinical trial to evaluate its efficacy on chronic spinal cord injury patients. Objectives: The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of lithium on chronic spinal cord injury patients. Setting: A major spinal cord injury rehabilitation center in Beijing, China. Methods: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 6-week parallel treatment arms with lithium carbonate and with placebo. A total of 40 chronic spinal cord injury subjects were recruited. Oral lithium carbonate was titrated or placebo was simulated to maintain the serum lithium level of 0.6–1.2 mmol l −1 for 6 weeks, followed by a 6-month follow-up. The functional outcomes and the neurological classifications, as well as the safety parameters, adverse events and pharmacokinetic data were carefully collected and monitored. Results: No significant changes in the functional outcomes and the neurological classifications were found. The only significant differences were in the pain assessments using visual analog scale comparing the lithium and the placebo group. No severe adverse event was documented in the study. Conclusion: The lithium treatment did not change the neurological outcomes of patients with chronic spinal cord injury. It is worth to investigate whether lithium is effective in the treatment of neuropathic pain in chronic spinal cord injury. Sponsorship: China Spinal Cord Injury Network Company Limited.

IntroductionFracture healing can fail in up to 10% of cases despite appropriate treatment. While lithium has been the standard treatment for bipolar disorder, it may also have a significant impact to increase bone healing in patients with long bone fractures. To translate this knowledge into clinical practice, a randomised clinical trial (RCT) is proposed.Methods and analysisA multicentre double blind, placebo-controlled RCT is proposed to evaluate the efficacy of lithium to increase the rate and predictability of long bone fracture healing in healthy adults compared to lactose placebo treatment. 160 healthy individuals from 18 to 55 years of age presenting with shaft fractures of the femur, tibia/fibula, humerus or clavicle will be eligible. Fractures will be randomised to placebo (lactose) or treatment (300 mg lithium carbonate) group within 2 weeks of the injury. The primary outcome measure will be radiographic union defined as visible callus bridging on three of the four cortices at the fracture site using a validated radiographic union score. Secondary outcome measures will include functional assessment and pain scoring.Ethics and disseminationParticipant confidentiality will be maintained with publication of results. Research Ethics Board Approval: Sunnybrook Research Institute (REB # 356–2016). Health Canada Approval (HC6-24-C201560). Results of the main trial and secondary endpoints will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at conferences.Trial registration number NCT02999022.

Objective: This study examined the long-term effectiveness of lithium for the treatment of pediatric bipolar disorder within the context of combination mood stabilizer therapy for refractory mania and pharmacological treatment of comorbid psychiatric conditions. Methods: Outpatients, ages 7–17 years, meeting American Psychiatric Association, Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th ed. (DSM-IV) diagnostic criteria for bipolar disorder I (BP-I) (manic or mixed) who demonstrated at least a partial response to 8 weeks of open-label treatment with lithium (Phase I) were eligible to receive open-label lithium for an additional 16 weeks (Phase II). Up to two adjunctive medications could be prescribed to patients experiencing residual symptoms of mania or comorbid psychiatric conditions, following a standardized algorithm. Results: Forty-one patients received continued open-label long-term treatment with lithium for a mean of 14.9 (3.0) weeks during Phase II. The mean weight-adjusted total daily dose at end of Phase II was 27.8 (6.7) mg/kg/day, with an average lithium concentration of 1.0 (0.3) mEq/L. Twenty-five of the 41 patients (60.9%) were prescribed adjunctive psychotropic medications for residual symptoms. The most frequent indications for adjunctive medications were refractory mania (n=13; 31.7%) and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) (n=15; 36.6%). At the end of this phase 28 (68.3%) patients met a priori criteria for response (≥50% reduction from Phase I baseline in Young Mania Rating Scale [YMRS] summary score and a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement [CGI-I] score of 1 or 2), with 22 (53.7%) considered to be in remission (YMRS summary score≤12 and CGI-Severity score of 1 or 2). These data suggest that patients who initially responded to lithium maintained mood stabilization during continuation treatment, but partial responders did not experience further improvement during Phase II, despite the opportunity to receive adjunctive medications. The most commonly reported (≥20%) adverse events associated with lithium treatment were vomiting, headache, abdominal pain, and tremor. Conclusions: Lithium may be a safe and effective longer-term treatment for patients with pediatric bipolar disorder who respond to acute treatment with lithium. Partial responders to acute lithium did not appear to experience substantial symptom improvement during the continuation phase, despite the possibility that adjunctive medications could be prescribed.

Objective: The diagnosis and treatment of youth with severe nonepisodic irritability and hyperarousal, a syndrome defined as severe mood dysregulation (SMD) by Leibenluft, has been the focus of increasing concern. We conducted the first randomized double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in SMD youth, choosing lithium on the basis of its potential in treating irritability and aggression and neuro-metabolic effects. Methods: SMD youths 7–17 years were tapered off their medications. Those who continued to meet SMD criteria after a 2-week, single-blind, placebo run-in were randomized to a 6-week double-blind trial of either lithium (n = 14) or placebo (n = 11). Clinical outcome measures were: (1) Clinical Global Impressions–Improvement (CGI-I) score less than 4 at trial's end and (2) the Positive and Negative Syndrome Scale (PANSS) factor 4 score. Magnetic resonance spectroscopy (MRS) outcome measures were myoinositol (mI), N-acetyl-aspartate (NAA), and combined glutamate/glutamine (GLX), all referenced to creatine (Cr). Results: In all, 45% (n = 20/45) of SMD youths were not randomized due to significant clinical improvement during the placebo run-in. Among randomized patients, there were no significant between-group differences in either clinical or MRS outcome measures. Conclusion: Our study suggests that although lithium may not result in significant clinical or neurometabolic alterations in SMD youths, further SMD treatment trials are warranted given its prevalence.

Background The weaknesses of classical explanatory randomized controlled trials (RCTs) include limited generalizability, high cost, and time burden. Pragmatic RCTs nested within electronic health records (EHRs) can be useful to overcome such limitations. Serum lithium monitoring has often been underutilized in real-world practice in Japan. This trial aims to evaluate the effectiveness of the EHR-nested reminder system for serum lithium level monitoring in the maintenance of therapeutic lithium concentration and in the improvement of the quality of care for patients on lithium maintenance therapy. Methods The Kyoto Toyooka nested controlled trial of reminders (KONOTORI trial) is an EHR-nested, parallel-group, superiority, stratified, permuted block-randomized controlled trial. Screening, random allocation, reminder output, and outcome collection will be conducted automatically by the EHR-nested trial program. Patients with a mood disorder taking lithium carbonate for maintenance therapy will be randomly allocated to the two-step reminder system for serum lithium monitoring or to usual care. The primary outcome is the achievement of therapeutic serum lithium concentration between 0.4 and 1.0 mEq/L at 18 months after informed consent. Discussion The KONOTORI trial uses EHRs to enable the efficient conduct of a pragmatic trial of the reminder system for lithium monitoring. This may contribute to improved quality of care for patients on lithium maintenance therapy. Trial registration University Hospital Medical Information Network (UMIN) Clinical Trials Registry, UMIN000033633 . Registered on 3 July 2018.

Background Lithium, an established psychiatric medication, has recently been shown to enhance new bone formation in preclinical fracture models. Current research is focused on evaluating the efficacy of low-dose, short-term lithium treatment to improve long bone fracture healing through a Phase II randomized clinical trial (LiFT NCT02999022). In working towards future applications of lithium for fracture management, this study aimed to understand the current perceptions of lithium as a psychiatric drug and the potential barriers to its orthopaedic adoption. Methods Three questionnaires, evaluating knowledge about lithium and willingness to embrace its use in fracture healing were disseminated among the general population, fracture patients eligible for the LiFT (Lithium for Fracture Treatment) trial and orthopaedic surgeons across Canada. Results Of the 768 public respondents, 84% were willing to take a medication that would aid fracture healing but only 62.6% if the medication was lithium. Willingness dropped to 44.6% among the 168 respondents who knew about the psychiatric use of lithium. Lack of sufficient knowledge ( n  = 50) and concerns about side effects including effects on the brain ( n  = 74) were the main reasons cited by those who were unwilling to use lithium. Of the 29 fracture patients, only 20 patients had previously heard of lithium. Of these, 40% were willing to take lithium for fracture healing with an additional 10% if the dose was low or if the intake duration was short. Only 50% knew that lithium has side effects. Of the 43 orthopaedic surgeons, 38 surgeons knew about clinical use of lithium. Of these, 68% knew that lithium has side effects and 29% knew that it interacts with other drugs. While most agreed that new strategies are needed to improve fracture management, only 68% were willing to prescribe lithium for fractures with an additional 16% if there is scientific evidence and/or a standard dosing protocol. Conclusions This study identified a lack of knowledge about uses and side effects of lithium among all three cohorts. A robust educational framework for orthopaedic surgeons, their patients and the members of their clinical care teams will be essential to widespread repurposing of lithium for fracture care.

Objective: The primary goal of this exploratory study was to obtain data that could lead to evidence-based dosing strategies for lithium in children and adolescents suffering from bipolar I disorder. Methods: Outpatients aged 7–17 years meeting Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 4th edition, diagnostic criteria for bipolar I disorder (manic or mixed) were eligible for 8 weeks of open label treatment with lithium in one of three dosing arms. In Arm I, participants began treatment at a dose of 300 mg of lithium twice daily. The starting dose of lithium in Arms II and III was 300 mg thrice daily. Patients in Arms I and II could have their dose increased by 300 mg/day, depending on clinical response, at weekly visits. Patients in Arm III also had mid-week telephone interviews after which they could also have their dose of lithium increased by 300 mg per day. Youths weighing <30 kg were automatically assigned to Arm I, whereas youths weighing ≥30 kg were randomly assigned to Arm I, II, or III. Randomization was balanced by age (7–11 years, 12–17 years) and sex in approximately equal numbers. A priori response criteria were defined as a Clinical Global Impressions-Improvement scale score of ≤2 and a 50% decrease from baseline on the Young Mania Rating Scale. Results: Of the 61 youths [32 males (52.5%)] who received open-label lithium, 60 youths completed at least 1 week of treatment and returned for a postbaseline assessment. Most patients had a ≥50% improvement in Young Mania Rating Scale score, and more than half of the patients (58%) achieved response. Overall, lithium was well tolerated. All three treatment arms had similar effectiveness, side effect profiles, and tolerability of lithium. Conclusions: On the basis of these results, a dosing strategy in which pediatric patients begin lithium at a dose of 300 mg thrice daily (with an additional 300 mg increase during the first week), followed by 300 mg weekly increases until a priori stopping criteria are met, will be used in an upcoming randomized, placebo-controlled trial.