@article{ManchiaAdliAkulaetal.2013,
  author    = {Manchia, Mirko and Adli, Mazda and Akula, Nirmala and Arda, Raffaella and Aubry, Jean-Michel and Backlund, Lena and Banzato, Claudio E. M. and Baune, Bernhard T. and Bellivier, Frank and Bengesser, Susanne and Biernacka, Joanna M. and Brichant-Petitjean, Clara and Bui, Elise and Calkin, Cynthia V. and Cheng, Andrew Tai Ann and Chillotti, Caterina and Cichon, Sven and Clark, Scott and Czerski, Piotr M. and Dantas, Clarissa and Del Zompo, Maria and DePaulo, J. Raymond and Detera-Wadleigh, Sevilla D. and Etain, Bruno and Falkai, Peter and Fris{\´e}n, Louise and Frye, Mark A. and Fullerton, Jan and Gard, S{\´e}bastien and Garnham, Julie and Goes, Fernando S. and Grof, Paul and Gruber, Oliver and Hashimoto, Ryota and Hauser, Joanna and Heilbronner, Urs and Hoban, Rebecca and Hou, Liping and Jamain, St{\´e}phane and Kahn, Jean-Pierre and Kassem, Layla and Kato, Tadafumi and Kelsoe, John R. and Kittel-Schneider, Sarah and Kliwicki, Sebastian and Kuo, Po-Hsiu and Kusumi, Ichiro and Laje, Gonzalo and Lavebratt, Catharina and Leboyer, Marion and Leckband, Susan G. and L{\´o}pez Jaramillo, Carlos A. and Maj, Mario and Malafosse, Alain and Martinsson, Lina and Masui, Takuya and Mitchell, Philip B. and Mondimore, Frank and Monteleone, Palmiero and Nallet, Audrey and Neuner, Maria and Nov{\´a}k, Tom{\´a}s and O'Donovan, Claire and {\"O}sby, Urban and Ozaki, Norio and Perlis, Roy H. and Pfennig, Andrea and Potash, James B. and Reich-Erkelenz, Daniela and Reif, Andreas and Reininghaus, Eva and Richardson, Sara and Rouleau, Guy A. and Rybakowski, Janusz K. and Schalling, Martin and Schofield, Peter R. and Schubert, Oliver K. and Schweizer, Barbara and Seem{\"u}ller, Florian and Grigoroiu-Serbanescu, Maria and Severino, Giovanni and Seymour, Lisa R. and Slaney, Claire and Smoller, Jordan W. and Squassina, Alessio and Stamm, Thomas and Steele, Jo and Stopkova, Pavla and Tighe, Sarah K. and Tortorella, Alfonso and Turecki, Gustavo and Wray, Naomi R. and Wright, Adam and Zandi, Peter P. and Zilles, David and Bauer, Michael and Rietschel, Marcella and McMahon, Francis J. and Schulze, Thomas G. and Alda, Martin},
  title     = {Assessment of Response to Lithium Maintenance Treatment in Bipolar Disorder: A Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) Report},
  series = {PLoS ONE},
  volume    = {8},
  journal   = {PLoS ONE},
  number    = {6},
  doi       = {10.1371/journal.pone.0065636},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-130938},
  pages     = {e65636},
  year      = {2013},
  abstract  = {Objective: The assessment of response to lithium maintenance treatment in bipolar disorder (BD) is complicated by variable length of treatment, unpredictable clinical course, and often inconsistent compliance. Prospective and retrospective methods of assessment of lithium response have been proposed in the literature. In this study we report the key phenotypic measures of the "Retrospective Criteria of Long-Term Treatment Response in Research Subjects with Bipolar Disorder" scale currently used in the Consortium on Lithium Genetics (ConLiGen) study. Materials and Methods: Twenty-nine ConLiGen sites took part in a two-stage case-vignette rating procedure to examine inter-rater agreement [Kappa (\(\kappa\))] and reliability [intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC)] of lithium response. Annotated first-round vignettes and rating guidelines were circulated to expert research clinicians for training purposes between the two stages. Further, we analyzed the distributional properties of the treatment response scores available for 1,308 patients using mixture modeling. Results: Substantial and moderate agreement was shown across sites in the first and second sets of vignettes (\(\kappa\) = 0.66 and \(\kappa\) = 0.54, respectively), without significant improvement from training. However, definition of response using the A score as a quantitative trait and selecting cases with B criteria of 4 or less showed an improvement between the two stages (\(ICC_1 = 0.71\) and \(ICC_2 = 0.75\), respectively). Mixture modeling of score distribution indicated three subpopulations (full responders, partial responders, non responders). Conclusions: We identified two definitions of lithium response, one dichotomous and the other continuous, with moderate to substantial inter-rater agreement and reliability. Accurate phenotypic measurement of lithium response is crucial for the ongoing ConLiGen pharmacogenomic study.},
  language  = {en}
}
@article{LeopoldBauerBechdolfetal.2020,
  author    = {Leopold, Karolina and Bauer, Michael and Bechdolf, Andreas and Correll, Christoph U. and Holtmann, Martin and Juckel, Georg and Lambert, Martin and Meyer, Thomas D. and Pfeiffer, Steffi and Kittel-Schneider, Sarah and Reif, Andreas and Stamm, Thomas J. and Rottmann-Wolf, Maren and Mathiebe, Josephine and Kellmann, Eva L. and Ritter, Philipp and Kr{\"u}ger-{\"O}zg{\"u}rdal, Seza and Karow, Anne and Sondergeld, Lene-Marie and Roessner, Veit and Sauer, Cathrin and Pfennig, Andrea},
  title     = {Efficacy of cognitive-behavioral group therapy in patients at risk for serious mental illness presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms: Results from a prespecified interim analysis of a multicenter, randomized, controlled study},
  series = {Bipolar Disorders},
  volume    = {22},
  journal   = {Bipolar Disorders},
  number    = {5},
  doi       = {10.1111/bdi.12894},
  url       = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-215469},
  pages     = {517 -- 529},
  year      = {2020},
  abstract  = {Objective Most patients with bipolar disorders (BD) exhibit prodromal symptoms before a first (hypo)manic episode. Patients with clinically significant symptoms fulfilling at-risk criteria for serious mental illness (SMI) require effective and safe treatment. Cognitive-behavioral psychotherapy (CBT) has shown promising results in early stages of BD and in patients at high risk for psychosis. We aimed to investigate whether group CBT can improve symptoms and functional deficits in young patients at risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms. Method In a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial, patients at clinical risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms aged 15-30 years were randomized to 14 weeks of at-risk for BD-specific group CBT or unstructured group meetings. Primary efficacy endpoints were differences in affective symptomatology and psychosocial functioning at 14 weeks. At-risk status was defined as a combination of subthreshold bipolar symptomatology, reduction of psychosocial functioning and a family history for (schizo)affective disorders. A prespecified interim analysis was conducted at 75\% of the targeted sample. Results Of 128 screened participants, 75 were randomized to group CBT (n = 38, completers = 65.8\%) vs unstructured group meetings (n = 37, completers = 78.4\%). Affective symptomatology and psychosocial functioning improved significantly at week 14 (P < .001) and during 6 months (P < .001) in both groups, without significant between-group differences. Findings are limited by the interim character of the analysis, the use of not fully validated early detection interviews, a newly adapted intervention manual, and the substantial drop-outs. Conclusions Results suggest that young patients at-risk for SMI presenting with subthreshold bipolar symptoms benefit from early group sessions. The degree of specificity and psychotherapeutic interaction needed requires clarification.},
  language  = {en}
}